Case Name: Edward A. Bell and Hattie B. Karsch, Respondents, v. Karsch Brewing Company, Tenant-Respondent, and George Kahrmann, Under-tenant-Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1906-12
Citations: 52 Misc. 159
Docket Number: 
Parties: Edward A. Bell and Hattie B. Karsch, Respondents, v. Karsch Brewing Company, Tenant-Respondent, and George Kahrmann, Under-tenant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 52
Pages: 159–159

Head Matter:
Edward A. Bell and Hattie B. Karsch, Respondents, v. Karsch Brewing Company, Tenant-Respondent, and George Kahrmann, Under-tenant-Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term,
December, 1906.)
Summary proceedings — Sufficiency of petition — Allegations as to petitioners’ right.
In summary proceedings an allegation that the petitioners are the landlords of the premises is insufficient, and a final order made thereon will be reversed.
Appeal by nnd or-tenant from final order of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, tenth district, borough of Manhattan, in favor of the landlords.
James I. Moore, for appellant.
Gifford & Cox, for respondents.

Opinion:
Gildersleeve, J.
This is a summary proceeding. The petition alleged " that said petitioners are the landlords of the premises hereinafter described." This was the only allegation therein, setting forth or attempting to set forth the interest of the petitioners in said premises as required by section 2235 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This statement has repeatedly been held to be insufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the court to entertain these proceedings. Ferber v. Apfel, 99 N. Y. Supp. 215, and cases there cited. Prompt objection to the form of the petition was made by the defendant herein, but without avail, and a final order in the landlords' favor was made. It must be reversed.
Eitzgebald and Davis, JJ., concur.
Final order reversed, with- costs tc appellant.