A review of paragraph 26 of the lease indicates that it is sufficiently broad to trigger the implied covenant of Real Property Law § 234 in the tenant's favor, inasmuch as it permits landlord to recover attorney's fees incurred in litigation caused by the tenant's breach of the lease (seeKatz Park Ave. Corp. v. Jagger, 98 A.D.3d 921, 922, 951 N.Y.S.2d 497 [2012] ; Casamento v. Juaregui, 88 A.D.3d 345, 362, 929 N.Y.S.2d 286 [2011] ; 354 E. 66th St. Realty Corp. v. Curry, 40 Misc.3d at 22, 969 N.Y.S.2d 713 ). As the lease covenants run in favor of successors, occupant, as the tenant's successor, is entitled, to recover attorney's fees (see 245 Realty Assoc., 243 A.D.2d at 35–36, 673 N.Y.S.2d 635 ; Classic Props. v. Martinez, 173 Misc.2d 556, 662 N.Y.S.2d 980 [App.Term, 1st Dept.1997] ). Paragraph 26 of the lease states that attorney's fees “not in excess of $200, shall be deemed reasonable,” which means only that the reasonableness of $200 or less in attorney's fees need not be otherwise determined, but that if landlord seeks attorney's fees in an amount greater than $200, that amount will be allowed only if it is determined to be reasonable.
I respectfully dissent. The issue is whether a tenant who moves from one apartment to another apartment in the same premises [662 N.Y.S.2d 980] to act as superintendent becomes an employee only subject to removal when his employment is terminated or does the landlord-tenant relationship survive. This Court summarized the applicable law in Gottlieb v. Adames, N.Y.L.J. 9/23/94, p. 21 c. 2: