From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kim v. Idylwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 2009
66 A.D.3d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Summary

holding that independent violations of the lease were incurable and thus an independent basis for denial of a Yellowstone Injunction

Summary of this case from 106 Spring St. Owner LLC v. Workspace, Inc.

Opinion

October 20, 2009.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Stallman, J.), entered on or about March 31, 2009, which denied plaintiffs' application for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendant from terminating a commercial lease and for a temporary restraining order tolling the applicable cure period, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, Moskowitz, Renwick and DeGrasse, JJ.


The motion court found, after a hearing, that plaintiffs had not previously and continuously maintained insurance coverage as required by their commercial lease. This violation was a material breach of the lease ( see C N Camera Elecs. v Farmore Realty, 178 AD2d 310, 311) and, in these circumstances, an incurable violation that is an independent basis for the denial of Yellowstone relief ( see Grenadeir Parking Corp. v Landmark Assoc., 294 AD2d 313, 314, lv denied 99 NY2d 553; Zona, Inc. v Soho Centrale, 270 AD2d 12, 14). Plaintiffs' attempt to demonstrate their ability and readiness to cure the alleged violation by procuring, during the cure period, insurance coverage prospectively for the remaining 10 months of their lease term is unavailing, as such policy does not protect defendant against the unknown universe of any claims arising during the period of no insurance coverage.

We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments and, in light of our determination that the failure to maintain insurance coverage was an incurable violation, need not address them.


Summaries of

Kim v. Idylwood

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 2009
66 A.D.3d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

holding that independent violations of the lease were incurable and thus an independent basis for denial of a Yellowstone Injunction

Summary of this case from 106 Spring St. Owner LLC v. Workspace, Inc.

In Kyung Sik Kim v. Idylwood, NY, LLC (66 AD3d 528, 529 [1st Dept 2009]), the Appellate Division held that failure to carry adequate insurance is a material breach of a lease and that a such a breach may not be cured by obtaining prospective insurance coverage.

Summary of this case from W & G Wines LLC v. Golden Chariot Holdings LLC

In Kyung Sik Kim v Idylwood, NY, LLC (66 AD3d 528, 529 [1st Dept 2009]), the Appellate Division held that failure to carry adequate insurance is a material breach of a lease and that a such a breach may not be cured by obtaining prospective insurance coverage (see also Kramer v Bohensky, 27 Misc 3d 1237[A], 2010 NY Slip Op 51089[U], *6).

Summary of this case from Khatari v. Shami

In Kyung Sik Kim v. Idylwood, NY, LLC (66 AD3d 528, 529 [1st Dept 2009]), the Appellate Division held that failure to carry adequate insurance is a material breach of a lease and that a such a breach may not be cured by obtaining prospective insurance coverage (see also Kramer v. Bohensky, 27 Misc.3d 1237[A], 2010 N.Y. Slip Op 51089 [U], *6).

Summary of this case from Khatari v. Shami
Case details for

Kim v. Idylwood

Case Details

Full title:KYUNG SIK KIM et al., Appellants, v. IDYLWOOD, N.Y., LLC, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 20, 2009

Citations

66 A.D.3d 528 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
886 N.Y.S.2d 337

Citing Cases

60G 542 Broadway Owner, LLC v. Prince Fashions, Inc.

Although policies were obtained by, and named, the subtenants as the insureds, the record evidence…

117-119 Leasing Corp. v. Reliable Wool Stock, LLC.

Lastly, the Notice indicates that plaintiff breached the Lease by not previously and continuously maintaining…