Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Citation
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Parent Document
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2003-02-25
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/6346658/chan-v-adossa/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (27)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
- Chan v. Adossa, 195 Misc. 2d 590 (2003)
Full Text
641 charsAccordingly, we hold that the Civil Court had “subject matter jurisdiction” over this proceeding (see Mandel v Pitkowsky, supra [indicating that the proceeding failed only because no amendment had been sought to include the MDR allegations]; 123 E. 83rd St. Co. v Kagan, NYLJ, Oct. 6, 1987, at 14, col 6 [App Term, 1st Dept]; Beacway Operating Corp. v Hult, NYLJ, Mar. 13, 1992, at 21, col 2 [App Term, 1st Dept]; cf. 9 Montague Terrace Assoc. v Feuerer, supra [holding that where the lack of a registration has been cured, a nonpayment proceeding should not be dismissed]), and we reinstate the petition and deny tenant’s motion to dismiss.