From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Home Ins. Co. v. Olympia York Maiden Lane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 7, 1995
219 A.D.2d 469 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

September 7, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.).


The lease at issue expressly stated that the annual Operating Statements forwarded by the landlord would become "conclusive and binding" on the tenant in absence of timely dispute within 60 days of receipt thereof and, where no immediate settlement could be reached, in absence of a demand for arbitration within 120 days of receipt. The landlord was entitled to rely upon the express terms of the lease ( see, Matter of New York Plaza Bldg. Co. [Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon Co.], 103 A.D.2d 203, 208-209). Plaintiff concedes that it never disputed the Operating Statements for the years in question, nor demanded arbitration with respect thereto. Accordingly, plaintiff's claims are precluded, and the complaint properly was dismissed.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Williams, JJ.


Summaries of

Home Ins. Co. v. Olympia York Maiden Lane

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 7, 1995
219 A.D.2d 469 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Home Ins. Co. v. Olympia York Maiden Lane

Case Details

Full title:HOME INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. OLYMPIA YORK MAIDEN LANE COMPANY et…

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

Date published: Sep 7, 1995

Citations

219 A.D.2d 469 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
631 N.Y.S.2d 158

Citing Cases

Paramount Leasehold, L.P. v. 43rd St. Deli, Inc.

According to the express terms of article 38I of the lease, the amount of percentage rent that landlord…

Matter of Jack Kent Cooke, Inc.

Neither a tolling of the contractual time limit by way of fraud nor by equitable estoppel has any application…