From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

T.W. Dress Corp. v. Kaufman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 24, 1988
143 A.D.2d 900 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

October 24, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Molloy, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We conclude that the plaintiff's motion for a Yellowstone injunction (see, First Natl. Stores v Yellowstone Shopping Center, 21 N.Y.2d 630, rearg denied 22 N.Y.2d 827), was properly denied. In order to preserve the right to cure a default under the lease by a declaratory judgment action, the tenant must obtain a stay of the period within which the default may be cured (see, First Natl. Stores v Yellowstone Shopping Center, supra, at 637; Health N Sports v Providence Capitol Realty Group, 75 A.D.2d 884). In the instant case, the plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction and obtained a temporary restraining order tolling the cure period pending the hearing of the motion. On the return date of the motion, however, the plaintiff's counsel failed to appear and obtain an extension of the temporary restraining order. Consequently, the cure period expired and the defendants served a termination notice in accordance with the terms of the lease. Thereafter, the plaintiff procured a second order to show cause, seeking the identical Yellowstone relief sought in the prior order.

The plaintiff contends that the lapse of the first temporary restraining order was a mere technicality and not irrevocable. We disagree. The failure of the plaintiff to toll the curative period under the lease divested the court of its power to grant a Yellowstone injunction (see, First Natl. Stores v Yellowstone Shopping Center, supra; Norlee Wholesale Corp. v 4111 Hempstead Turnpike Corp., 138 A.D.2d 466). We reject the argument that the failure of the plaintiff's counsel to obtain an extension of the temporary restraining order constituted "an erroneous or inadvertent failure to continue a properly granted ex parte toll" (Mann Theatres Corp. v Mid-Island Shopping Plaza Co., 94 A.D.2d 466, 476, affd 62 N.Y.2d 930).

We have examined the plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Kunzeman, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

T.W. Dress Corp. v. Kaufman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 24, 1988
143 A.D.2d 900 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

T.W. Dress Corp. v. Kaufman

Case Details

Full title:T.W. DRESS CORP., Appellant, v. MYRON L. KAUFMAN et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Oct 24, 1988

Citations

143 A.D.2d 900 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

S & M Bronx Inc. v. Mosholu Petrol Realty LLC

This violation was a material breach of the lease and, in these circumstances, an incurable violation that is…

Reynolds v. Kadanoff Haussman, P. C

The appellants' contention is without merit. The stay of enforcement of proceedings to enforce the…