Case ID: misc2d_35/html/0161-01.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

Helen Kimmel, Appellant, v. Jane Hughes, Respondent.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    June 28, 1962.
    
      Donald Crichton and Louis J. Shaw for appellant. Simon N. Hilliman for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

The Municipal Court was bound by the order of the Rent Commission which duly ordered and adjusted maximum rent of the tenant’s apartment by reason of a subtenancy therein of tenant’s cousin (David Holding Corp. v. Held, 105 N. Y. S. 2d 27; 83 Ridge St. Corp. v. Schnitzer, 199 Misc. 826; Pontello v. O’Shea, 200 Misc. 417). Moreover, section 55 of the State Rent and Eviction Regulations specifies the persons who stand in the relationship of ‘ ‘ immediate family ’ ’. A cousin is not within the contemplation of this section.

The final order should be modified to the extent of granting landlord judgment for the additional sum of $21, and as modified affirmed, with $25 costs.

Concur — • Hoestadter, J. P., Hecht and Tilzer, JJ.

Pinal order modified, etc.