Case ID: ny-st-rep_36/html/0795-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ellen Carter, Resp’t, v Mary Anderson et al., App’lts.
    
      (New York Common Pleas, General Term,
    
    
      Filed February 2, 1891.)
    
    Restitution.
    On the reversal of a judgment awarding possession of premises to plaintiff, restitution cannot be awarded to the defendants where the premises are actually in the possession of one not a party to the action under a lease for a term of years which is unexpired.
    Motion for restitution. For decision on the appeal from judgment see 34 ISI". Y. State Bep., 756.
    
      Hoe & Macklin, for the motion; William P. Burr, in opposition.
   Per Curiam.

As it appears by the moving papers that Hugh C. McGrown is in possession of the premises under a lease which is not to expire until May 1, 1893, restitution cannot be awarded. Code Civ. Pro., § 1323; Costar v. Peters, 4 Abb., N. S., 53; but the petitioners must be remitted to their remedy by action. Market National Bank v. Pacific National Bank, 102 N. Y., 464; 2 N. Y. State Rep., 58.

Motion denied, but without costs.

Allen, Bischoff and Pryor, JJ., concur.