Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1946

Playland Holding Corp. v. Nunley

Playland Holding Corp. v. Nunley
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 26, 1946
186 Misc. 864; 65 N.Y.S.2d 465; 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2851

Counsel

Milton Harawits for appellant., Charles R. Ellner and David Koss for respondents.

Playland Holding Corp. v. Nunley

Opinion of the Court

Memorandum Per Curiam.

An amusement park does not come within the category of any of the enumerated places of public assembly which are expressly excepted from the operation of chapter 314 of the Laws of 1945 (Business Bent Law). Consequently, the penny arcade space occupied by the tenants herein is subject to the provisions of the statute. Upon the trial, however, the uncontradicted evidence established that the landlord sought in good faith to recover possession of the demised premises for its own immediate use.

The final order should be unanimously reversed upon the law and facts, with $10 costs to the landlord, and final order directed for the landlord, with appropriate costs in the court below.

MacCrate, Smith and Steinbrink, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.