Rauch v. Mossberg Garage Corp.
Louise A. Rauch v. Mossberg Garage Corporation
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
The Commercial Rent Law (L. 1945, ch. 3, as amd.) was not" designed to, and does not, regulate the relationship between the operator of a public garage and one who has his automobile stored or garaged therein — at least where, as in the present case, no definite space is assigned to him. As is clear from its language, its history and its purpose, the statute extends its protective coverage only to those who, as tenants, either possess or occupy a specified and measurable area of commercial real estate. Obviously, one who simply garages a car in a public garage is not a tenant within the meaning of that statute.
The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Loughran, Ch. J., Lewis, Conway, Desmond, Dye, Fuld and Froessel, JJ., concur.
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.