The New York herald., 1922-04-22
new LESSEES CAN'T
invoke RENT LAWS
Appellate Division Decides
Emergency Act Created
Preferred Class.
REALTY MEN VICTORS
Thousands Of Cases of Dis
puted Payments Affect
ed by Ruling.
FIVE OF JUDGES CONCUR
Decision Says: Why Shouldn't
Man Who Paid $50 for SIS
Suite Seek Redress?
FIVE OF JUDGES CONCUR

Landlords gained point yesterday
In a decision handed down by the
Appellate Division of the Supreme
Court, which ruled that the emergency
rent legislation created a preferred
class of tenants and did not apply to
those who have leased new apartments
since the laws became operative
Thousands of cases in which pre-
viously no distinction between old and
new tenants has been drawn are said
TO be affected by the opinion in this
test case.
The action went to the higher court
on appeal from an order of the late
Supreme Court Justice Hotchkiss. The
decision of the Appellate Court was in
favor OF the Farnham Realty Cor
poration, owners of the Wellsmore
apartments. FITS Broadway. as against
William NJ. Posncr, a tenant. who af-
ter executing written lease and NOV
ing into his apartment after the rent
laws went into effect, sought later to
recover rent for one month on the
ground that the rent demanded in
accordance with the terms of the lease
was excessive and the agreement un-
Just and unreasonable.
Justice Alfred r. Page wrote the
opinion in which Juctlccs Victor j.
Bowling. Walter Lloyd Smith and
Edgar S. X. MerreIl concurred. Justice
Frank G. Laugnlin dissented on the
opinion. but concurrcd in the result.
Opinion OF the Court.
After citing precedents from previous
opinions OF the Court OF Appeals and
the United States District Court for
this district. Justice Page wrote:
1T clearly appears that the intent
OF the Legislature was judicially de-
clared to be to make n preferred class
of those tenants who were in possession
az dwellings,. apartments or tenement
houses prior to October l, 1920, and to
permit them to remain In possession
until November l. 1872, so long as they
paid reasonable rent 20 be ascertaincG
in the manner prescribed In the statute
The only justification or the exercise
OF the extraordinary power to tabc con-
troll of private property and devote Il
ta private use. TO suspend the Or
ulndIy processes Oh the courts, 10 I'M
pair the obligations OF contracts and to
interfere with the freedom to contrac.
was found in the police power Of the
State in dealing with puolic emer-
gency, which the Legislature declared
existed.
1T should be clearly borne in minc
that the emergency was not the ad-
vance in rents by reason of the housing
shortage as sequence OF the worlc
war, for the prices OF food. clothing anc
other necessities of life had advanced
proportionately with the rentals OF rea-
estate.
THE emergency arose from the fact
that. by reason of the inadequacy o.
housing facilities, those in possession
were required to pay exorbitant rent.
under threat OF dispossession. and that
upward of 100000 such proceedings had
been instituted in the city of New York
The turning into the streets of 100000
or 500. 900 persons. or the alternative oil
submission TO extortionate demands for
rent created the emergency. The de-
mand that the tenant submit to extor-
tion or have his family put upon tho
street was held TO have interfered with
tho freedom of contract. as one OF the
parties was under duress."
when tho Cases Differed.
None Of these considerations. it was
argued. operated In the case I a persor
out OF possession who was seeking 2
home. The relations between landlord
and such a person we're held 10 be equal
the latter being able to refuse to sigr
n lease If the rent demanded seemed ex-
,cssivc. Tho decision continues:
s"In the case under consideration tbs
tenant voluntarily signed the lease and
agreed TO pay the rent reseried, ant
paid il without question for eight
months Now, on the theory of duress
nc seeks TO escape from his contract and
lsvc jury make contract for him
that will be binding on the landlord.
"ff such an argument can be accepted
why should not the man who bought q
suit of clothes from his tailor for $50
which he could have obtained In pre-waI
days for s75, be allowed to refuse u
pay. on the ground that the price wat
Unreasonable. and ask that jury dc.
tsTmine what the tailor Is entitled to re-
ceive and at what rate he shall continue
80 furnish his clothes?'
Mr. Posner sought 10 recover rent FOL
July. 1o2t. after he had signed 2 leas,
for The apartment October s, 1920, fol
ono year and eleven and half months
from October IL. The rent Is under
stood to have been fixed at $4,000 ;
year. Mr.. posner paid up TO and In
Guiding June. 1921. and then declined tc
continue at the stipulated rate.