Seabrook v. Commuter Housing Co.
New York City Civil Court
338 N.Y.S.2d 67, 72 Misc. 2d 6 (1972)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Seabrook (plaintiff) signed a lease in Commuter Housing Co.’s (CHC) (defendant) apartment building, which was under construction at the time. Seabrook paid a month’s rent and security deposit up front. She was not represented by counsel when she signed the lease. The lease was to begin on March 1, 1972, but contained clauses that stated that if the building was not ready by the time the lease was to begin, the lease would begin on the day the construction was completed. CHC did not point out these clauses to Seabrook when she signed the lease. The building was not completed on March 1. On May 12, 1972, Seabrook notified CHC that she could not wait any longer for construction and asked that the lease be cancelled. CHC refused to cancel the lease. On June 29, 1972, CHC notified Seabrook that the building was complete and that the lease would begin on July 1, 1972, four months after the lease was originally scheduled to begin. Seabrook brought suit to recover the month’s rent and security deposit she paid.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kassoff, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 788,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
