1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Misc.2d
  4. 128 Misc.2d
  5. 128 Misc.2d 179 (1985)
 

SOUTHCROFT CO. v. KONOPKO

128 Misc.2d 179 (1985)

Southcroft Company, Petitioner, v. Peninah Konopko, Respondent.

Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County.

May 6, 1985

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Lansner & Wendt for respondent. Finkelstein, Borah, Schwartz, Altschuler & Goldstein, P. C., for petitioner.

EDWARD H. LEHNER, J.

Before the court is respondent's motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (2) and (7) because the petition fails to specify facts which support the allegation that the premises are subject to the Rent Stabilization Law. Although 22 NYCRR 2900.21 (e) requires that the petition allege the basis for coverage, the court holds that, under modern pleading rules, such failure is not jurisdictional and the petition may be appropriately...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases