Andejo Corp. v. South Street Seaport Ltd. Partnership

130 A.D.3d 411, 13 N.Y.S.3d 55
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 2, 2015
Docket15621 603707/04
StatusPublished

This text of 130 A.D.3d 411 (Andejo Corp. v. South Street Seaport Ltd. Partnership) 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
Andejo Corp. v. South Street Seaport Ltd. Partnership, 130 A.D.3d 411, 13 N.Y.S.3d 55 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo S. Hagler, J.), entered November 14, 2013, which, following a nonjury trial, awarded defendants *412 landlords South Street Seaport Limited Partnership and Seaport Marketplace, L.L.C. full and exclusive use and possession of the subject premises, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no basis upon which to disturb the factual findings of the trial court which rest largely on credibility determinations and are supported by evidence establishing that plaintiff tenant was in default of its lease based on its failure to pay rent and utilities (see Claridge Gardens v Menotti, 160 AD2d 544 [1st 1990]). The lease provided that upon “the occurrence and continuance of an Event of default,” defendants landlords, without notice, could elect to terminate the lease.

The trial court also properly found, based on evidence that plaintiff tenant deliberately and intentionally violated other lease provisions by failing to pay any utility charges for approximately a decade and misreporting gross sales, that equitable considerations do not warrant a finding that plaintiff should not forfeit the lease (see First Natl. Stores v Yellowstone Shopping Ctr, 21 NY2d 630, 637 [1968]).

We have considered plaintiff tenant’s remaining arguments, including that it was entitled to exercise an option to renew the lease, and find them unavailing. Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Sweeny, Renwick, Saxe and Feinman, JJ.

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

Related

First National Stores, Inc. v. Yellowstone Shopping Center, Inc.
237 N.E.2d 868 (New York Court of Appeals, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
130 A.D.3d 411, 13 N.Y.S.3d 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/andejo-corp-v-south-street-seaport-ltd-partnership-nyappdiv-2015.