Emily Towers Owners Corp. v. Carleton Emily Towers, L.P.

175 Misc. 2d 283, 669 N.Y.S.2d 462, 1997 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 666
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided November 13, 1997·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order unanimously modified by granting defendant’s cross [284]*284motion in its entirety and. remanding the matter to the court below for determination of the reasonable value of the attorney’s fees, and, as so modified, order affirmed without costs.

The offering plan, proprietary lease and by-laws when read together evidence a clear intent to exempt the holdovers of "Unsold Shares” in the cooperative association from any increases in parking charges (see, Tompkins v Hale, 172 Misc 1071, affd 259 App Div 860, affd 284 NY 675). Defendant is therefore entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to Real Property Law § 234 (see, North Star Graphics v Spitzer, 135 AD2d 401, lv dismissed 72 NY2d 841).

Aronin, J. P., Scholnick and Patterson, JJ., concur.

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

Emily Towers Owners Corp. v. Carleton Emily Towers, L.P., 175 Misc. 2d 283, 669 N.Y.S.2d 462, 1997 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 666 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

175 Misc. 2d 283 (Emily Towers Owners Corp. v. Carleton Emily Towers, L.P.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tompkins v. Hale
30 N.E.2d 721 (New York Court of Appeals, 1940)
Tompkins v. Hale
259 A.D. 860 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1940)
Tompkins v. Hale
172 Misc. 1071 (New York Supreme Court, 1939)
North Star Graphics, Inc. v. Spitzer
135 A.D.2d 401 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)