From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Artcorp Inc. v. Citirich Realty Corp.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 26, 2015
124 A.D.3d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)

Opinion

2015-01-26

ARTCORP INC., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. CITIRICH REALTY CORP., Defendant–Respondent.

Moulinos & Associates LLC, New York (Peter Moulinos of counsel), for appellant. Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C., New York (Paul N. Gruber of counsel), for respondent.



Moulinos & Associates LLC, New York (Peter Moulinos of counsel), for appellant. Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C., New York (Paul N. Gruber of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., DeGRASSE, RICHTER, CLARK, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Nancy Bannon, J.), entered June 20, 2014, which denied plaintiff's motion for a Yellowstone injunction, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, and the motion granted.

To obtain Yellowstone relief a tenant need not show a likelihood of success on the merits (WPA/Partners LLC v. Port Imperial Ferry Corp., 307 A.D.2d 234, 237, 763 N.Y.S.2d 266 [1st Dept.2003] ). It can simply deny the alleged breach of its lease ( see Boi To Go, Inc. v. Second 800 No. 2 LLC, 58 A.D.3d 482, 870 N.Y.S.2d 334 [1st Dept.2009] ). Contrary to defendant landlord's contention, plaintiff tenant clearly asserted its willingness to cure the allegedly improper assignment of its shares, and had the ability to do so either by transferring its shares back to the deceased owner's estate ( see East Best Food Corp. v. N.Y. 46th LLC, 56 A.D.3d 302, 867 N.Y.S.2d 77 [1st Dept.2008] ) or by seeking consent from the landlord ( see Gettinger Assoc., LLC v. Abraham Kamber & Co. LLC, 103 A.D.3d 535, 960 N.Y.S.2d 37 [1st Dept.2013] ). Further, consent may be obtained after the assignment and even in the absence of a lease provision authorizing this post-assignment cure ( see Empire State Bldg. Assoc. v. Trump Empire State Partners, 245 A.D.2d 225, 229, 667 N.Y.S.2d 31 [1st Dept.1997] ). Zona, Inc. v. Soho Centrale, 270 A.D.2d 12, 704 N.Y.S.2d 38 (1st Dept.2000) is distinguishable because the tenant there failed to assert that it had the ability to cure its default.


Summaries of

Artcorp Inc. v. Citirich Realty Corp.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Jan 26, 2015
124 A.D.3d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
Case details for

Artcorp Inc. v. Citirich Realty Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ARTCORP INC., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. CITIRICH REALTY CORP.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jan 26, 2015

Citations

124 A.D.3d 545 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)
124 A.D.3d 545
2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 650

Citing Cases

Mid Atl. Inc. v. 4250 Broadway Retail Owners LLC

Plaintiff, however, has cured the cause of any such condition and demonstrates a readiness, willingness, and…

Ted Baker Ltd. v. Wooster St., LLC

The limited purpose of a Yellowstone injunction is to toll plaintiff tenant's time to cure a default claimed…