Case Name: WECHSLER v. O. J. GUDE CO.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1909-07-06
Citations: 117 N.Y.S. 1037
Docket Number: 
Parties: WECHSLER v. O. J. GUDE CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 117
Pages: 1037–1039

Head Matter:
WECHSLER v. O. J. GUDE CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
July 6, 1909.)
Landlord and Tenant (§ 154 )—Breach by Lessee of Covenant to Repair —Damages.
Where an action by a landlord for the breach of lessee’s covenant to repair is brought before the expiration of the term, the measure of damage is the injury to the reversion, and the action must be dismissed for failure to show such damages.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Landlord and Tenant, Dec. Dig. §. 154. ]
MacLean, J., dissenting.
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh District.
Action by Sigmund Wechsler against the O. J. Gude Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, P. J., and MacLEAN and SEABURY, JJ.
Ralph V. Wechsler (Sigmund Wechsler, of counsel), for appellant.
Mayer & Gilbert (A. S. Gilbert, of counsel), for respondent.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
GILDERSLEEVE, P. J.
This action was brought during the continuance of a written lease to recover the reasonable costs of repairs, which the defendant was bound, under said written contract of lease, to do, but which defendant refused to do, and which plaintiff himself did at his own expense. The action is for breach of contract to repair. Under the authority of Appleton v. Marx, 191 N. Y. 81, 83 N. E. 563, 16 L. R. A. (N. S.) 210, where an action, brought by a landlord for the breach of a lessee's covenant to keep the premises in repair, is commenced before the expiration of the term, the measure of damage is the injury done to the reversion, while, if the action is brought after the expiration of the term,o the measure of damage is the cost of putting the premises into repair. Plaintiff sought to prove damages upon the latter theory; but, as the action was brought before the expiration of the term, the court dismissed the complaint for failure to show damage to the reversion, but without prejudice to a new action. The judgment should ;be affirmed) with costs.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
SEABURY, J., concurs.