Hyperlawhypertext legal database Sugarman v. Goldberg 100 N.Y.S. 1012

← Cases

Sugarman v. Goldberg

100 N.Y.S. 1012 Court N.Y. App. Term Decision date 1906-11-14 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1012
SUGARMAN v. GOLDBERG.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
November 14, 1906.)

Headnote

Vendos and Purchases—Incumbrances—Unexpired Lease.
A lease which does not terminate until after the time fixed in a contract of sale of the premises for the delivery of a deed thereof is an incumbrance.
[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 48, Cent Dig. Vendor and Purchaser, § 252.]
Appeal from City Court of New York.
Action by Joseph Sugarman against Samuel Goldberg. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, DUGRO, and DOWLING, JJ.
Joseph Wilkenfeld, for appellant.
Tobias A. Keppler, for respondent.

The surrender of the lease was from April 30th; the time for delivery of the deed, April 11th. Manifestly the lease was an incumbrance not provided for in the contract, and the plaintiff is entitled to recover. The case shows no prejudicial error.

The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.