North Shore Mart v. F. W. Woolworth Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

North Shore Mart v. F. W. Woolworth Co.

124 A.D.2d 574, 507 N.Y.S.2d 718, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 61883

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

DecidedNovember 3, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 124 A.D.2d 574 (North Shore Mart v. F. W. Woolworth Co.) 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

North Shore Mart v. F. W. Woolworth Co., 124 A.D.2d 574, 507 N.Y.S.2d 718, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 61883 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

Although the meaning of the term "demolish” is not necessarily confined to the complete razing of a building (see, Jack LaLanne Biltmore Health Spa v Builtland Partners, 99 AD2d 705, appeal dismissed 62 NY2d 777; Friedman v Ontario Holding Corp., 279 App Div 23, affd 304 NY 625), the evidence submitted by the plaintiff on this motion for summary judgment did not establish that the completed and proposed building modifications herein constitute the demolition of "more than 50% of the ground floor building area * * * in the shopping center of which the demised premises is a part”, as that term is defined in paragraph 6 of the lease agreement. [575]*575Accordingly, summary judgment should have been denied. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

Although the meaning of the term "demolish” is not necessarily confined to the complete razing of a building (see, Jack LaLanne Biltmore Health Spa v Builtland Partners, 99 AD2d 705, appeal dismissed 62 NY2d 777; Friedman v Ontario Holding Corp., 279 App Div 23, affd 304 NY 625), the evidence submitted by the plaintiff on this motion for summary judgment did not establish that the completed and proposed building modifications herein constitute the demolition of "more than 50% of the ground floor building area * * * in the shopping center of which the demised premises is a part”, as that term is defined in paragraph 6 of the lease agreement. [575]*575Accordingly, summary judgment should have been denied. Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 A.D.2d 574, 507 N.Y.S.2d 718, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 61883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-shore-mart-v-f-w-woolworth-co-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack