Opinion
June 4, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, J.).
We agree with the IAS Court that it is likely that defendant Zaro's, if permitted to sell the type of food specified in the use clause of its lease with defendant Mid-City, would be competing directly with plaintiff's fast food establishments in contravention of the restrictive covenant in plaintiff's lease with defendant Mid-City. Since the revenues that would be lost by plaintiff's businesses to a newly opened Zaro's Bread Basket are difficult to determine and indeed may be wholly speculative, a legal remedy is inadequate (see, Rosano v. Sperber, 64 N.Y.S.2d 35, 37). The large sums Zaro's has spent setting up its new Bread Basket do not tip the equities in its favor, since it proceeded with full knowledge of the restrictive covenant and the possibility that it would not be construed in its favor (see, Weiss v. Mayflower Doughnut Corp., 1 N.Y.2d 310, 316).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Milonas, Kupferman, Asch and Smith, JJ.