Opinion
January 26, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Isseks, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The renewal clause of the lease is clear and unambiguous. The renewal option specifically limited those areas which were subject to change and provided for a change in the minimum annual rent, but did not provide for any change in the percentage rent. Since the two were not expressly dependent upon each other by the express language of the initial lease, no provision for any change in the percentage rent can be inferred from the documents. Accordingly, the court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Spatt, JJ., concur.