From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Alphonse Hotel Corporation v. 76 Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 20, 2000
273 A.D.2d 124 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

June 20, 2000.

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered on or about April 12, 1999 and May 12, 1999, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, granted plaintiff landlord use and occupancy pendente lite from January 1, 1999, at the rate of $32,100 per month, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Menachem J. Kastner, for plaintiff-respondent.

Steven Sperber, for defendants-appellants.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Ellerin, Lerner, Buckley, Friedman, JJ.


The ambiguities in the parties' lease respecting the amount of rent due each month should be construed against the drafter, here defendant tenants (see, Trief v. Elghanayan, 251 A.D.2d 123). Moreover, the court has broad discretion in awarding use and occupancy pendente lite (see, E. 4th St. Garage v. Estate of Berkowitz, 265 A.D.2d 249), and defendants remain free to demonstrate that a lower rate was actually agreed upon and that the landlord's actions prevented them from opening their nightclub until March 1999.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Alphonse Hotel Corporation v. 76 Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 20, 2000
273 A.D.2d 124 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Alphonse Hotel Corporation v. 76 Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ALPHONSE HOTEL CORPORATION, ETC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. 76 CORP., ETC.…

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

Date published: Jun 20, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 124 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
710 N.Y.S.2d 890

Citing Cases

Dahl v. Prince Holdings 2012, LLC

In or around February 2015, RPL § 220 provides that a "landlord may recover a reasonable compensation for the…

Wythe Berry Fee Owner LLC v. Wythe Berry LLC

The U & O sought here is discretionary U & O, pursuant to Real Property Law § 220, and not U & O pursuant to…