Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

197 Misc. 270

Kaplan v. Sessler

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · decided 1950-03-09

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently December 1953

2 state decisions

Relies on Goldstein v. Alweiss

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1950-03-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1The maintenance of a television aerial or wire running from a window of respondents’ apartments to the roof of the premises was, under the circumstances disclosed, an intrusion or squatting upon the landlords ’ property within the purview of section 1411 of the Civil Practice Act (Goldstein v. Alweiss, 196 Misc. 513, and reports therein cited; see, also, Joan Building Corp. v. Gould, 276 App. Div. 765).

¶2The final orders should be unanimously reversed upon the law, with $30 costs to landlords, and final orders directed for landlords as prayed for in the petitions.

¶3Steinbbink, Rubenstein and Golden, JJ., concur.

¶4Final orders reversed, etc.

/197/misc/270 · .json · Public domain