Majority
p. 877Emanden Realty Corp., Appellant, v. Richard Angley, Respondent. Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, May 7, 1959.
Newman, Aronson & Neumann (Edwin Ostrow of counsel), for appellant. Tenant appearing in person by Mrs. Richard Angley.
The unauthorized installation of the washing machine and its retention after notice was a violation of a material provision of the lease ( L. H. Estates Co. v. Bartholomew, 9 Misc 2d 116 ). There was no proof of waiver of the terms of the lease.
The final order should be reversed, with $30 costs, and final order directed for landlord, with costs.
(dissenting). The lease does not prohibit absolutely the installation of a washing machine; it requires only the consent of the landlord in writing to the installation. The trial court’s finding, on sufficient evidence, of a waiver
Dissent
p. 878
necessarily implies oral consent. That is enough to create a valid waiver of the requirement of written consent (Alcon v. Kinton Realty, 2 A D 2d 454 , 456; Beatty v. Guggenheim Exploration Co., 225 N. Y. 380 , 387; Adams-Flanigan Co. v. Kling, 198 App. Div. 717 , 720, affd. 234 N. Y. 497 ; Sol Apfel, Inc. v. Kocher, 61 N. Y. S. 2d 508 , affd. 272 App. Div. 758 ). Hence, I dissent.
Steuer and Tilzer, JJ., concur; Hoestadter, J., dissents in memorandum.
Final order reversed, etc.
Cases cited
- L. H. Estates Co. v. Bartholomew 9 Misc 2d 116 p. 877
- Alcon v. Kinton Realty, Inc. 2 A D 2d 454 at 456 p. 878
- Beatty v. Guggenheim Exploration Co. 225 N. Y. 380 at 387 p. 878
- Adams-Flanigan Co. v. Kling 234 N. Y. 497 p. 878