Majority
p. 1073POPIEL v. MANHASSET MORTGAGE CO. (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department. April 14, 1914.) Argued March term, 1914, before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and BIJUR, JJ.
Headnote
Landlord and Tenant (§ 129[1] )—Action by Tenant—Exclusion from Possession—Recovery of Deposit.Though the tenant did not prove damage from the landlord’s failure to put him in possession of the leased premises, he could recover a money deposit made with the landlord when the lease was executed; such amount not having been tendered or paid in court by the landlord.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Cent. Dig. §§ 450-457; Dec. Dig. § 129.[1] ]
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of the Bronx, Second District.
Action by Abraham Popiel against the Manhasset Mortgage Company. Prom a judgment of the Municipal Court for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed, and judgment ordered for plaintiff.
Haskel Corenthal, of New York City, for appellant.
Thomas J. Brady, of New York City, for respondent.
The plaintiff did not prove satisfactorily any damage for. the failure on the part of the defendant landlord to put
p. 1074
him into possession of the premises, leased by him, but it was conceded that he paid the defendant a deposit of $23 at the time the lease was made. No sufficient tender of this amount was shown, nor was it paid into court by the defendant. The plaintiff should therefore have had judgment for this amount.
Judgment reversed, without costs, and judgment ordered for the plaintiff in the sum of $23 and disbursements in the court below.