Opinion
2471.
December 11, 2003.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), entered May 9, 2003, which, inter alia, in this action seeking a declaration that there is a valid lease entitling plaintiff to continued tenancy of the subject commercial premises, granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of declaring in defendant's favor that there is no lease pursuant to which plaintiff may continue to tenant the premises, and otherwise affirmed, with costs to defendant payable by plaintiff.
Phillip A. Bocketti, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Eric M. Zim, Defendant-Respondent.
Before: Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Williams, Lerner, JJ.
Assuming that defendant, by forwarding plaintiff a Lease Extension and Modification Agreement, offered to extend the term of plaintiff's expiring lease — which contained no renewal option — the offer was effectively withdrawn some three months after it had been made, prior to plaintiff's putative acceptance. Moreover, the Agreement, even if timely executed by plaintiff would not have been binding on defendant because defendant did not execute it and deliver it to plaintiff ( see General Obligations Law § 5-703; and see 219 Broadway Corp. v. Alexander's, Inc., 46 N.Y.2d 506, 511; Jaffe v. Gordon, 240 A.D.2d 232).
We modify only to declare in defendant's favor ( see Lanza v. Wagner, 11 N.Y.2d 317, 334, appeal dismissed 371 U.S. 74, cert denied 371 U.S. 901).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.