Case ID: misc2d_21/html/0274-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Per Curiam.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Andrew Swimmer et al., Doing Business as Andrew Swimmer & Son, Appellants, v. Edward Janis et al., Doing Business as Janis Realty Co., Respondents.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    November 12, 1959.
    
      Fried & Fried (Benjamin H. Fried of counsel), for appellants.
    
      Gerard M. Bloomfield for respondents.
   Per Curiam.

The jury waiver in paragraph “23” of the lease must be construed strictly (Caplan v. Goldman, 197 Misc. 404, affd. 278 App. Div. 807). So read, the waiver is confined to action brought to recover rent or damages under paragraph “ 23 ”. It does not incorporate or contemplate the tort action instituted by plaintiffs (Gach v. Kanelit Realty Corp., 106 N. Y. S. 2d 871; Rappoport v. Elmorton Holding Corp., 167 Misc. 82; Schaefer v. Ohland, 105 N: Y. S. 2d 935; Frohlich & Hager v. Amalgamated Props., 181 Misc. 127; Parise v. Seaman Trucking Co., 278 App. Div. 845).

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs, and motion denied.

Concur — Hofstadter, J. P., Aurelio and Tilzer, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.