
    Jacob J. Hecht, Respondent, v. Samuel Maness, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
    April 1, 1960.
    
      Maness Maness (Richard L. Levenson of counsel), for appellant. Emanuel B. Quint and Benjamin Hager for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

A summary proceeding to recover possession of real property is not.an action within the purview of rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice but a special proceeding (People ex rel. Livermore v. Hamilton, 39 N. Y. 107; Handshke v. Loysen, 203 App. Div. 21; Civ. Prae. Act, §§ 1415, 1430, 1437, 1445) and summary judgment is not available therein on the issue of landlord’s right to possession (905 West End Ave. Corp. v. Peers, 118 Misc. 754; Macomber v. Wilkinson, 6 N. Y. S. 2d 608; Miressi v. Funicello, 277 App. Div. 931; Healy v. H. K. Realty Corp., 13 Misc 2d 447; cf. 8008 Realty Corp. v. Rubin, 85 N. Y. S. 2d 163; Alexander v. O’Brien, 6 N. Y. S. 2d 614; Trustees of Freeholders & Commonalty of Town of East Hampton v. De Angelis, 4 A D 2d 752).

The final order and order dated December 1, 1959 should be unanimously reversed on the law and facts, with $10 costs to the tenant and landlord’s motion for summary judgment denied.

Concur — Di Giovanna, Benjamin and Daly, JJ.

Final order reversed, etc.  