Double C Realty Corp. v. Craps, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Double C Realty Corp. v. Craps, LLC

58 A.D.3d 480, 870 N.Y.S.2d 333

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 2009

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 58 A.D.3d 480 (Double C Realty Corp. v. Craps, LLC) 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

Double C Realty Corp. v. Craps, LLC, 58 A.D.3d 480, 870 N.Y.S.2d 333 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

[481]*481Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered July 11, 2008, which, in an action by a tenant against its landlord involving the validity of tenant’s exercise of an option to renew the subject lease, denied plaintiff-tenant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting plaintiffs motion to dismiss the fourth affirmative defense based upon the Rule Against Perpe-tuities and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

By its terms, the lease provides that plaintiff’s options to extend the term of the lease “shall be exercised by written notice given to the Lessor at least one (1) year before the expiration of the Initial Term hereof, or, in the event Lessee has previously exercised one or more options herein given, such notice shall be given at least six (6) months before the expiration of such option term.” Such options clearly originate in one of the lease provisions, are not exercisable after lease expiration, and are incapable of separation from the lease. Thus, as options “appendant” or “appurtenant” to the lease, they are valid even though the holder’s, in this case plaintiffs, interest may vest beyond the perpetuities period and are not contemplated by EPTL 9-1.1 (b) (Symphony Space v Pergola Props., 88 NY2d 466, 480 [1996]). We have considered plaintiff’s other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Nardelli, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

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

[481]*481Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered July 11, 2008, which, in an action by a tenant against its landlord involving the validity of tenant’s exercise of an option to renew the subject lease, denied plaintiff-tenant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of granting plaintiffs motion to dismiss the fourth affirmative defense based upon the Rule Against Perpe-tuities and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

By its terms, the lease provides that plaintiff’s options to extend the term of the lease “shall be exercised by written notice given to the Lessor at least one (1) year before the expiration of the Initial Term hereof, or, in the event Lessee has previously exercised one or more options herein given, such notice shall be given at least six (6) months before the expiration of such option term.” Such options clearly originate in one of the lease provisions, are not exercisable after lease expiration, and are incapable of separation from the lease. Thus, as options “appendant” or “appurtenant” to the lease, they are valid even though the holder’s, in this case plaintiffs, interest may vest beyond the perpetuities period and are not contemplated by EPTL 9-1.1 (b) (Symphony Space v Pergola Props., 88 NY2d 466, 480 [1996]). We have considered plaintiff’s other arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Andrias, J.P., Nardelli, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 A.D.3d 480, 870 N.Y.S.2d 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/double-c-realty-corp-v-craps-llc-nyappdiv-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack