Mid Valley Associates, LLC v. Foot Locker Specialty, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mid Valley Associates, LLC v. Foot Locker Specialty, Inc.

28 A.D.3d 206, 812 N.Y.S.2d 511

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

DecidedApril 4, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.3d 206 (Mid Valley Associates, LLC v. Foot Locker Specialty, Inc.) 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

Mid Valley Associates, LLC v. Foot Locker Specialty, Inc., 28 A.D.3d 206, 812 N.Y.S.2d 511 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered April 21, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In this action against a tenant for unpaid rent, the motion court properly found that plaintiff had recognized defendant’s assignee as the new tenant under the lease by accepting rent from it directly and granting it an additional renewal not included in the lease, thus releasing the original tenant, by operation of law, from its obligation to pay rent (cf. 185 Madison Assoc. v Ryan, 174 AD2d 461 [1991]).

We have considered plaintiff’s other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Friedman, Nardelli, Sweeny and Malone, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered April 21, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In this action against a tenant for unpaid rent, the motion court properly found that plaintiff had recognized defendant’s assignee as the new tenant under the lease by accepting rent from it directly and granting it an additional renewal not included in the lease, thus releasing the original tenant, by operation of law, from its obligation to pay rent (cf. 185 Madison Assoc. v Ryan, 174 AD2d 461 [1991]).

We have considered plaintiff’s other contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Friedman, Nardelli, Sweeny and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.3d 206, 812 N.Y.S.2d 511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mid-valley-associates-llc-v-foot-locker-specialty-inc-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack