
    Stayton Realty Corporation, Respondent, v. Leopold B. Rhodes, Appellant.
    
      Landlord and tenant • — ■ action for rent ■ — • defense of duress — chapter 944 of Laws of 1920 not retrospective.
    
    
      Stayton Realty Corpn. v. Rhodes, 200 App. Div. 108, affirmed.
    (Argued June 5, 1922;
    decided July 12, 1922.)
    Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 3, 1922, which reversed an order of Special Term denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted said, motion. The action was brought to recover rent under a written lease of premises executed March 22, 1920, for a term of three years commencing October 1, 1920. The answer set up separate defenses based upon the theory of statutory duress under chapter 944 of the Laws of 1920, and of common-law duress. The Appellate Division held that the statutory defense created by the 1920 rent laws was not retrospective in operation and hence did not apply to the lease in suit and that the attempted defense of common-law duress was not a good defense to the action.
    
      Harold G. Aron for appellant.
    
      Lewis M. Isaacs for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane and Andrews, JJ.  