Opinion
No. 570183/22
09-27-2022
54-56 Management Corp., Petitioner-Landlord-Respondent, v. MTA Fine Arts Co., Inc., Respondent-Tenant-Appellant.
Unpublished Opinion
PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Tenant, as limited by its brief, appeals from that portion of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Ilana J. Marcus, J.), dated May 27, 2022, which granted landlord's motion to dismiss the first and second affirmative defenses and for summary judgment on the petition in a commercial nonpayment summary proceeding.
Order (Ilana J. Marcus, J.), dated May 27, 2022, affirmed, with $10 costs.
The written rent demand issued personally by "54-56 Management Corp. Landlord," specifying the amount of rent allegedly due by tenant and the period during which such rent accrued, satisfied the requirements of RPAPL 711(2) and was a sufficient predicate for the maintenance of this commercial nonpayment summary proceeding (see 1590 Lexington LLC v 1590 Corp., 53 Misc.3d 155 [A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51766[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016] ; Brusco v Miller, 167 Misc.2d 54 [App Term, 1st Dept 1995]). Contrary to tenant's assertion, "there is no signature requirement in RPAPL... 711[2]" (L & B 595 Madison Inc. v Susan Sheehan Inc., NYLJ, August 31, 1994, at 22, col.6 1994 NY Misc. Lexis 711 [Civ Ct, NY County, Gische, J.]).
Siegel v Kentucky Fried Chicken of Long Is. (67 N.Y.2d 792 [1986]), relied upon by tenant, is inapposite because tenant cites to no provision in the "lease between the parties requiring that the demand be signed by the landlord" (Yui Woon Kwong v Sun Po Eng, 183 A.D.2d 558, 560 [1992]).
All concur