600 Partners Co. v. Berger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

600 Partners Co. v. Berger

245 A.D.2d 140, 666 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13018

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 245 A.D.2d 140 (600 Partners Co. v. Berger) 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

600 Partners Co. v. Berger, 245 A.D.2d 140, 666 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13018 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered June 19, 1996 and on or about October 8, 1996, which granted defendants-respondents’ motions for re-argument of prior orders that denied their motions to dismiss the complaint as against them for failure to state a cause of action, and, upon reargument, granted the motions, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Since defendant partnership did not default on its rent until after both of the individual defendants involved in this appeal had already resigned from the firm, such defendants cannot be held liable for such rent, absent an agreement to the contrary (see, C. E. Hooper, Inc. v Perlberg, Monness, Williams & Sidel, 72 AD2d 687, appeal dismissed 49 NY2d 736; 59th & Park Assocs. v Inselbuch, 68 AD2d 838). Here, the lease upon which plaintiff relies provided that “[a]ny partner of Tenant who retires from the partnership and the estate of any deceased partner shall, upon such partner’s retirement or death, be immediately released hereunder and under [the accompanying] guaranty as to any liability with respect to the period after such retirement or death, provided that at least eight (8) partners of Tenant remain liable hereunder and under the guaranty”. We reject plaintiffs argument that because new partners had not signed the guarantee, the partnership had less than eight partners potentially liable thereunder at the time of defendants-respondents’ withdrawals (Partnership Law § 28). We have considered plaintiffs other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Colabella, JJ.

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

—Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered June 19, 1996 and on or about October 8, 1996, which granted defendants-respondents’ motions for re-argument of prior orders that denied their motions to dismiss the complaint as against them for failure to state a cause of action, and, upon reargument, granted the motions, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Since defendant partnership did not default on its rent until after both of the individual defendants involved in this appeal had already resigned from the firm, such defendants cannot be held liable for such rent, absent an agreement to the contrary (see, C. E. Hooper, Inc. v Perlberg, Monness, Williams & Sidel, 72 AD2d 687, appeal dismissed 49 NY2d 736; 59th & Park Assocs. v Inselbuch, 68 AD2d 838). Here, the lease upon which plaintiff relies provided that “[a]ny partner of Tenant who retires from the partnership and the estate of any deceased partner shall, upon such partner’s retirement or death, be immediately released hereunder and under [the accompanying] guaranty as to any liability with respect to the period after such retirement or death, provided that at least eight (8) partners of Tenant remain liable hereunder and under the guaranty”. We reject plaintiffs argument that because new partners had not signed the guarantee, the partnership had less than eight partners potentially liable thereunder at the time of defendants-respondents’ withdrawals (Partnership Law § 28). We have considered plaintiffs other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli and Colabella, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 140, 666 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13018, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/600-partners-co-v-berger-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack