Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Citation
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Parent Document
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 1999-03-03
Other Sections in This Document (17)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
- Bogatz v. Extra Touch International, Inc., 179 Misc. 2d 1029 (1999)
Full Text
1,010 charsThe rules of statutory construction would lead one to conclude that since a predicate notice must be served pursuant to RPAPL 735 in so many specified circumstances, the absence of such a provision in RPAPL 711 (1) means such service is not required. “A court cannot by implication supply in a statute a provision which it is reasonable to suppose the Legislature intended intentionally to omit; and the failure of the Legislature to include a matter within the scope of an act may be construed as an indication that its exclusion was intended.” (McKinney’s Cons Laws of NY, Book 1, Statutes § 74.) Thus, while a tenant may not waive a statutorily required notice in a lease, RPAPL 711 (1) does not require service of a notice pursuant to RPAPL 735. (Lana Estates v National Energy Reduction Corp., 123 Misc 2d 324 [Civ Ct, Queens County 1984]; Main St. Mall Corp. v NR Store, 155 Misc 2d 118 [New Rochelle City Ct 1992]; PAK Realty Assocs. v RE /MAX Universal, 157 Misc 2d 985 [Civil Ct, Queens County 1993].)