Sanchez v. City of New York Department of Ports & Trade

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sanchez v. City of New York Department of Ports & Trade

197 A.D.2d 467, 602 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10025

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

DecidedOctober 26, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 197 A.D.2d 467 (Sanchez v. City of New York Department of Ports & Trade) 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

Sanchez v. City of New York Department of Ports & Trade, 197 A.D.2d 467, 602 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10025 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered February 25, 1992, which, inter alia, granted summary judgment in favor of defendants City of New York Department of Ports and Trade, and Commissioner Wallace Ford, and order of the same court and Justice entered on or about January 23, 1992, which inter alia, denied plaintiffs’ motion for renewal, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

La Marqueta Associates, a limited partnership of which plaintiff S.J. Marqueta, Inc. is a 60% general partner and La Marqueta Development Corporation (LMDC) is a 40% general partner, was selected in 1988 to lease, manage, and renovate the premises known as La Marqueta, owned by the City of New York. LMDC is a wholly owned subsidiary of defendant General Atlantic Realty Corporation (GARC), a real estate development corporation which also guaranteed the plaintiffs’ partnership obligations under the lease. After lengthy negotiations failed to resolve numerous defaults by plaintiffs to maintain and renovate the premises, as required under the lease, a notice of cancellation was served terminating the lease as of August 8, 1990. Subsequent to the termination of the lease, the City entered into a new lease with an entity known as Constellation Marketplace Associates L.P., an entity with which GARC was affiliated.

Contrary to their claim, plaintiffs have not controverted the municipal defendants’ assertions that there were numerous violations of the lease, not the least of which was plaintiffs’ failure to maintain the physical integrity of the premises. While plaintiffs assert that their failure to renovate the [468]*468premises was caused by the failure of the City to disclose the easements in favor of Metro-North, we note that the lease was subject to said easements, and that, in any event, the eight month delay attributable to this occurrence does not justify the failure of plaintiffs to commence renovation for over two years. The City had an absolute right to negotiate with the defendant GARC, as guarantor under the lease, and there is no evidence that these negotiations were undertaken in bad faith, or that plaintiffs were excluded from them. The mere fact that GARC continued to have an interest in the premises after plaintiffs’ lease was terminated does not suggest otherwise, in the absence of further evidence that the City purposely attempted to oust plaintiffs from their lease so as to benefit third parties. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered February 25, 1992, which, inter alia, granted summary judgment in favor of defendants City of New York Department of Ports and Trade, and Commissioner Wallace Ford, and order of the same court and Justice entered on or about January 23, 1992, which inter alia, denied plaintiffs’ motion for renewal, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

La Marqueta Associates, a limited partnership of which plaintiff S.J. Marqueta, Inc. is a 60% general partner and La Marqueta Development Corporation (LMDC) is a 40% general partner, was selected in 1988 to lease, manage, and renovate the premises known as La Marqueta, owned by the City of New York. LMDC is a wholly owned subsidiary of defendant General Atlantic Realty Corporation (GARC), a real estate development corporation which also guaranteed the plaintiffs’ partnership obligations under the lease. After lengthy negotiations failed to resolve numerous defaults by plaintiffs to maintain and renovate the premises, as required under the lease, a notice of cancellation was served terminating the lease as of August 8, 1990. Subsequent to the termination of the lease, the City entered into a new lease with an entity known as Constellation Marketplace Associates L.P., an entity with which GARC was affiliated.

Contrary to their claim, plaintiffs have not controverted the municipal defendants’ assertions that there were numerous violations of the lease, not the least of which was plaintiffs’ failure to maintain the physical integrity of the premises. While plaintiffs assert that their failure to renovate the [468]*468premises was caused by the failure of the City to disclose the easements in favor of Metro-North, we note that the lease was subject to said easements, and that, in any event, the eight month delay attributable to this occurrence does not justify the failure of plaintiffs to commence renovation for over two years. The City had an absolute right to negotiate with the defendant GARC, as guarantor under the lease, and there is no evidence that these negotiations were undertaken in bad faith, or that plaintiffs were excluded from them. The mere fact that GARC continued to have an interest in the premises after plaintiffs’ lease was terminated does not suggest otherwise, in the absence of further evidence that the City purposely attempted to oust plaintiffs from their lease so as to benefit third parties. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 A.D.2d 467, 602 N.Y.S.2d 854, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10025, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sanchez-v-city-of-new-york-department-of-ports-trade-nyappdiv-1993.