Opinion
Submitted October 25, 2000
November 21, 2000.
In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring that the defendant's refusal to consent to a proposed sublease is unreasonable, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garson, J.), dated June 7, 2000, which granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was, in effect, for summary judgment declaring that the defendant's refusal to consent to the plaintiff's sublease was unreasonable, and deemed the defendant to have given its consent thereto.
Peter J. Pruzan, New York, N.Y., for appellant.
Loeb Loeb, LLP, New York, N. Y. (Christian D. Carbone of counsel), for respondent.
Before: LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for the entry of an appropriate judgment.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, "Additional Rider No. 3" to the parties' lease did not bar the plaintiff from commencing this action when it did, as that provision places no restriction on the plaintiff's right to seek judicial intervention.
The defendant's remaining contention is also without merit.