From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Columbia Equities, Ltd. v. Apple Bank for Savings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 15, 1991
176 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

October 15, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Facelle, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In this action, the plaintiffs seek a judgment, inter alia, declaring that, since February 1, 1988, a month-to-month tenancy exists between themselves, as tenants, and the defendant, as landlord. In this regard, the plaintiffs assert that a purported exercise of their option to renew the leases between the parties was ineffective because of their breach of material provisions of those leases. In response, the defendant asserts that the plaintiffs effectively exercised the option to renew. With respect to the plaintiffs' claimed default under the leases, the defendant asserts that it waived any default.

The Supreme Court denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, concluding, inter alia, that questions of fact exist relating to the defendant's purported waiver of any default by the plaintiffs under the leases. We affirm (see, Jefpaul Garage Corp. v. Presbyterian Hosp., 61 N.Y.2d 442; Modlin v. Town Country Tux, 42 A.D.2d 586; see also, 74 N.Y. Jur 2d, Landlord and Tenant, § 737; 1 Rasch, New York Landlord and Tenant § 11:40 at 509 [3d ed]). We note that the plaintiffs specifically argue that the defendant is precluded, as a matter of law, from asserting that it waived their default under the leases. In support, the plaintiffs rely on a lease provision which required that any waiver by the landlord of a default by the tenant be in writing. This provision was patently for the landlord's sole benefit. Therefore, the defendant could properly forego its enforcement (see, Laxrand Constr. Corp. v. R.S.C.A. Realty Corp., 135 A.D.2d 685; De Freitas v. Holley, 93 A.D.2d 852; BPL Dev. Corp. v Cappel, 86 A.D.2d 591; see also, United Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. ICBC Corp., 64 A.D.2d 506; 22 N.Y. Jur 2d, Contracts, § 330; cf., W.W.W. Assocs. v. Giancontieri, 77 N.Y.2d 157). Accordingly, even in the absence of a written waiver, the defendant is not precluded from raising the issue of its waiver of the plaintiffs' default under the leases. Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Bracken and Copertino, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Columbia Equities, Ltd. v. Apple Bank for Savings

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 15, 1991
176 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Columbia Equities, Ltd. v. Apple Bank for Savings

Case Details

Full title:COLUMBIA EQUITIES, LTD., et al., Appellants, v. APPLE BANK FOR SAVINGS…

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

Date published: Oct 15, 1991

Citations

176 A.D.2d 780 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
575 N.Y.S.2d 108

Citing Cases

Calkins Corporate v. Eye Phy. Surgeons

We agree with plaintiff that it is of no moment that defendant did not comply with the nine-month notice…

Anita Babikian, Inc. v. TMA Realty, LLC

Here, as the parties agree, there is no ambiguity in the lease itself, so resort to parol evidence in order…