From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nanto MK Corp. v. J & E Realty

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 28, 2017
147 A.D.3d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

02-28-2017

NANTO MK CORP., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. J & E REALTY, et al., Defendants–Appellants.

The Schutzer Group, PLLC, New York (Eric Schutzer of counsel), for appellants. Thomas J. Sullivan at Law, Bronx (Thomas J. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.


The Schutzer Group, PLLC, New York (Eric Schutzer of counsel), for appellants.

Thomas J. Sullivan at Law, Bronx (Thomas J. Sullivan of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry R. Ostrager, J.), entered December 11, 2015, which denied defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) and (7), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint.

The documentary evidence conclusively establishes a defense to plaintiff's claim for specific performance of a lease renewal option. Both the original commercial lease and the proposed renewal lease expressly provide that the parties will not be bound to negotiated lease terms until defendants deliver a fully executed copy of the lease; defendants never delivered a fully executed copy of the proposed renewal lease (see Jordan Panel Sys. Corp. v. Turner Constr. Co., 45 A.D.3d 165, 169, 841 N.Y.S.2d 561 [1st Dept.2007] ). Plaintiff does not deny that it was in breach of certain lease provisions and that not being in breach was a condition precedent to exercising its right of renewal under the original lease. It argues instead that defendants waived any claim of breach by continuing to accept its regular rent payments without complaint. This argument is conclusively refuted by the non-waiver provision of the original lease (see Ahmed v. C.D. Kobsons, Inc., 67 A.D.3d 467, 890 N.Y.S.2d 469 [1st Dept.2009] ; Excel Graphics Tech. v. CFG/AGSCB 75 Ninth Avenue, 1 A.D.3d 65, 767 N.Y.S.2d 99 [1st Dept.2003], lv. dismissed 2 N.Y.3d 794, 781 N.Y.S.2d 292, 814 N.E.2d 464 [2004] ).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

RENWICK, J.P., MAZZARELLI, MOSKOWITZ, KAPNICK, WEBBER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Nanto MK Corp. v. J & E Realty

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 28, 2017
147 A.D.3d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Nanto MK Corp. v. J & E Realty

Case Details

Full title:NANTO MK CORP., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. J & E REALTY, et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 28, 2017

Citations

147 A.D.3d 695 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
47 N.Y.S.3d 706
2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 1506

Citing Cases

Intrepid Invs., LLC v. Selling Source, LLC

In particular, the so-called "confirmation letter," a related agreement signed by all parties to the…