One Ten West Fortieth Associates v. Isabel Ardee, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

One Ten West Fortieth Associates v. Isabel Ardee, Inc.

124 A.D.3d 500, 998 N.Y.S.2d 620

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 22, 2015·No. 111424/11 14008 14007·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered March 3, 2014, awarding plaintiff landlord the total sum of $46,437.23 against both defendants and further awarding plaintiff the total sum of $19,671.72 against defendant tenant Isabel Ardee, Inc., unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order (same court and Justice), entered February 24, 2014, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, and denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

The parties’ actions, which included tenant taking possession, landlord cashing the security deposit, and tenant making authorized renovations to the premises, all sufficiently evidenced the parties’ intent to convey an interest in the real estate sufficient to constitute “delivery” (219 Broadway Corp. v Alexander’s, Inc., 46 NY2d 506, 511-512 [1979]). Given that the lease was valid, tenant was liable for the unpaid rent sought. Further, pursuant to the express terms of the guaranty, guarantor was liable for attorney’s fees for this action.

Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Renwick, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered March 3, 2014, awarding plaintiff landlord the total sum of $46,437.23 against both defendants and further awarding plaintiff the total sum of $19,671.72 against defendant tenant Isabel Ardee, Inc., unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order (same court and Justice), entered February 24, 2014, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, and denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

The parties’ actions, which included tenant taking possession, landlord cashing the security deposit, and tenant making authorized renovations to the premises, all sufficiently evidenced the parties’ intent to convey an interest in the real estate sufficient to constitute “delivery” (219 Broadway Corp. v Alexander’s, Inc., 46 NY2d 506, 511-512 [1979]). Given that the lease was valid, tenant was liable for the unpaid rent sought. Further, pursuant to the express terms of the guaranty, guarantor was liable for attorney’s fees for this action.

Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Renwick, DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.

One Ten West Fortieth Associates v. Isabel Ardee, Inc., 124 A.D.3d 500, 998 N.Y.S.2d 620 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

124 A.D.3d 500 (One Ten West Fortieth Associates v. Isabel Ardee, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related