From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adams Drug Company, Inc. v. Knobel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 30, 1991
172 A.D.2d 470 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

April 30, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Stuart C. Cohen, J.).


The history of this matter is set forth in our opinion on a prior appeal ( 129 A.D.2d 401). On retrial, the court, pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, made its decision based on transcripts, documents, and other submissions of evidence adduced at the prior trial.

Plaintiff failed to meet its burden of proof that defendants' termination of plaintiff's tenancy was made in bad faith. The evidence adduced supported the view that defendant decided against rebuilding the premises because of its perceived inability to do so within 120 days, as provided by the lease, and its inability to finance the project. Plaintiff's reliance upon subsequent statements made by defendants before the Building Department is not dispositive of the issue of defendants' good faith. The distinct time frames with respect to these admittedly conflicting claims preclude application of the doctrine of estoppel, since defendants have not asserted any inconsistent positions with respect to the issue of good faith as of the time the notice of termination was served. (See, Kimco of N.Y. v Devon, 163 A.D.2d 573.)

The Court committed no error in considering the prior trial testimony of defendants, given the stipulation of the parties, and the fact that plaintiff relied upon portions of the testimony of these defendants but omitted other portions. (Grattan v Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 92 N.Y. 274; 57 N.Y.2d Jur 2d, Evidence and Witnesses, § 386.)

Lastly, plaintiff was properly precluded from resurrecting the claim that notice of termination was invalid because executed by an attorney, rather than the owner/landlord. (Siegel v. Kentucky Fried Chicken, 67 N.Y.2d 792.) Plaintiff abandoned this claim when it failed to raise the issue on appeal to the Court of Appeals from a prior determination in this matter ( 64 N.Y.2d 768, revg 102 A.D.2d 735; Matter of Pessano, 269 App. Div. 337, affd 296 N.Y. 564).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.


Summaries of

Adams Drug Company, Inc. v. Knobel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 30, 1991
172 A.D.2d 470 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Adams Drug Company, Inc. v. Knobel

Case Details

Full title:ADAMS DRUG COMPANY, INC., Appellant, v. FRANKLIN KNOBEL et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 30, 1991

Citations

172 A.D.2d 470 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
569 N.Y.S.2d 19

Citing Cases

Suntech II Int'l v. GS Site 25 Retail

Whether Suntech can ultimately prove that the notices were sent in bad faith is not for the court to decide…

Licorish v. Nor-Win Realty Corp.

Defendant-appellant was properly precluded from challenging the method of calculating interest used by the…