Cahill v. COHI Towers Associates

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cahill v. COHI Towers Associates

160 A.D.2d 325

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

DecidedApril 10, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 160 A.D.2d 325 (Cahill v. COHI Towers Associates) 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

Cahill v. COHI Towers Associates, 160 A.D.2d 325 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerald S. Held, J.), entered on or about July 11, 1988, which, inter alia, declared plaintiff’s rights in the leased premises, and awarded 6 cents compensatory damages and $15,000 punitive damages for interference with plaintiff’s right to use a certain storage area, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While the termination of the prime lease will ordinarily prevent the exercise of a renewal option in a sublease (see, Minister of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church v 198 Broadway, 59 NY2d 170), here, the acceptance of rent by defendant COHI Towers Associates, along with its assumption of the lease between plaintiff and the prime tenant, established that the sublease was to continue for the duration of its full term, including renewed -terms. As to the award of damages for interference with plaintiff’s use of the storage space, even if we were to consider the agreement as to the use of that space to constitute a mere license, as opposed to a lease, we would, nevertheless, find that the acceptance of the payments for use of this space and the assumption of the obligations of the sublease, which contained the purported license, made the agreement binding upon the defendants. We are satisfied that the trial court’s other findings were supported by the record, and the damages awarded were appropriate under the circumstances. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerald S. Held, J.), entered on or about July 11, 1988, which, inter alia, declared plaintiff’s rights in the leased premises, and awarded 6 cents compensatory damages and $15,000 punitive damages for interference with plaintiff’s right to use a certain storage area, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While the termination of the prime lease will ordinarily prevent the exercise of a renewal option in a sublease (see, Minister of Refm. Prot. Dutch Church v 198 Broadway, 59 NY2d 170), here, the acceptance of rent by defendant COHI Towers Associates, along with its assumption of the lease between plaintiff and the prime tenant, established that the sublease was to continue for the duration of its full term, including renewed -terms. As to the award of damages for interference with plaintiff’s use of the storage space, even if we were to consider the agreement as to the use of that space to constitute a mere license, as opposed to a lease, we would, nevertheless, find that the acceptance of the payments for use of this space and the assumption of the obligations of the sublease, which contained the purported license, made the agreement binding upon the defendants. We are satisfied that the trial court’s other findings were supported by the record, and the damages awarded were appropriate under the circumstances. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

160 A.D.2d 325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cahill-v-cohi-towers-associates-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack