477 Equities Corp. v. Bosha's Broome Street Holding, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

477 Equities Corp. v. Bosha's Broome Street Holding, Inc.

292 A.D.2d 274, 739 N.Y.S.2d 696, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3039

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 21, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 274 (477 Equities Corp. v. Bosha's Broome Street Holding, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

477 Equities Corp. v. Bosha's Broome Street Holding, Inc., 292 A.D.2d 274, 739 N.Y.S.2d 696, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3039 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered on or about August 22, 2001, which denied defendant commercial tenant’s motion for summary judgment declaring its right to make certain alterations to its premises located on the ground floor of a building owned and managed by plaintiffs, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant’s claim that plaintiffs consented to the proposed alterations was properly rejected for lack of evidentiary support. To the extent that the motion raised an issue as to whether the exterior ground floor windows that defendant wishes to alter, and which front the building’s residential lobby, [275]*275are within the demised premises or part of the building’s common elements, defendant failed to establish its right to summary judgment (CPLR 3212 [b], Eg])- Concur — Andrias, J.P., Buckley, Sullivan, Ellerin and Lemer, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered on or about August 22, 2001, which denied defendant commercial tenant’s motion for summary judgment declaring its right to make certain alterations to its premises located on the ground floor of a building owned and managed by plaintiffs, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant’s claim that plaintiffs consented to the proposed alterations was properly rejected for lack of evidentiary support. To the extent that the motion raised an issue as to whether the exterior ground floor windows that defendant wishes to alter, and which front the building’s residential lobby, [275]*275are within the demised premises or part of the building’s common elements, defendant failed to establish its right to summary judgment (CPLR 3212 [b], Eg])- Concur — Andrias, J.P., Buckley, Sullivan, Ellerin and Lemer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 274, 739 N.Y.S.2d 696, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/477-equities-corp-v-boshas-broome-street-holding-inc-nyappdiv-2002.