A Special Master found that defendant Foamex, L.P. was contractually obligated to Dude, Inc., “Dude” to remove certain storage tanks pursuant to the terms of the parties’ lease agreement wherein, upon termination of the lease, Foamex was to remove all of its equipment when vacating Dude’s Newnan property. As a consequence, Foamex was ordered to pay Dude a total of $81,198.11 in damages and fees. However, while finding for Dude on the breach of contract claim, the Special Master also concluded that Foamex was not in “default” on the lease agreement so as to permit Dude to assert a cross-default which would have allowed Dude to terminate twelve additional lease agreements that it holds with Foamex. The superior court adopted the Special Master’s findings and recommendations, making them the judgment of the court. Dude appeals, asserting error in the determination that Foamex was not in default and thereby precluding Dude’s exercise of the cross-default lease provisions. Because there is evidence to support the conclusion that no default occurred in this case and, thus, exercise of cross-default was unwarranted, we affirm. On appeal, Dude’s sole claim of error is that the Special Master’s finding that Foamex failed to remove its equipment as required by the express terms of the lease is per se a finding that Foamex “defaulted” under the lease, and therefore, the Special Master’s conclusion that Foamex was not in default is error as a matter of law. We disagree.
Under the terms of the lease at issue, a “Non-Monetary Default” is defined as an instance in which: Tenant fails to comply with any term, provision or covenant of this Lease and such failure continues for ninety 90 days after written notice thereof by Landlord to Tenant . . . provided that if the Non-Monetary Default cannot reasonably be cured within such ninety 90 day period, the Non-Monetary Default shall not be deemed to have occurred so long as Tenant commences curing such default within such ninety 90 day period, diligently pursues such cure thereafter, and actually cures such default with one hundred and eighty 180 days after the occurrence thereof. Emphasis supplied. Accordingly, and contrary to Dude’s contentions, a “default” is not synonymous with a “breach” of contract terms. Under the lease terms, a default includes the additional elements of notice and timely attempts to cure. Further, in order to exercise the cross-default provision of the lease when a Non-Monetary Default has occurred, the lease provides for a “Second Cure Period,” and,
