737 PARK AVENUE ACQUISITION LLC, Plaintiff/Counterclaim def, v. BARRY SHALOV DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFS. BARRY SHALOV Third-Part plf-ap, v. KATZ 737 CORPORATION, Third Party def-res

9902. 737 PARK AVENUE ACQUISITION LLC, Plaintiff/Counterclaim def, v. BARRY SHALOV DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFS. BARRY SHALOV Third-Part plf-ap, v. KATZ 737 CORPORATION, Third Party def-res — Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, New York (David M. Friedman of counsel), for ap — Matalon Shweky Elman PLLC, New York (Howard I. Elman of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez,J.), entered June 11, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, granted third-party defendant's motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from so much of the order as granted plaintiff's motion to dismiss the fourth, ninth, tenth, thirteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth affirmative defenses, unanimously withdrawn in accordance with the stipulation of the parties.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

9902. 737 PARK AVENUE ACQUISITION LLC, Plaintiff/Counterclaim def, v. BARRY SHALOV DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFS. BARRY SHALOV Third-Part plf-ap, v. KATZ 737 CORPORATION, Third Party def-res — Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman LLP, New York (David M. Friedman of counsel), for ap — Matalon Shweky Elman PLLC, New York (Howard I. Elman of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Manuel J. Mendez,J.), entered June 11, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from, granted third-party defendant’s motion to dismiss the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from so much of the order as granted plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the fourth, ninth, tenth, thirteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth affirmative defenses, unanimously withdrawn in accordance with the stipulation of the parties.

The 1995 lease upon which defendants, as tenants, base their thirdparty claims was superseded by the 2009 lease. The 2009 lease stated twice, in boldfaced upper-case letters, that the tenants lacked any right to renewals, and contained a merger clause barring claims under preceding agreements (see Purchase Partners II, LLC v. Westreich, 50 AD3d 499 [1st Dept 2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 702 [2009]). The tenant husband, who did not sign the 2009 lease, is estopped to deny his wife’s authority to sign on his behalf, because, inter alia, he ratified the lease by accepting the benefits of its two-year extension at below-market-rate rent without promptly seeking to rescind (see Dinhofer v. Medical Liab. Mut. Ins. Co., 92 AD3d 480 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 812 [2012]).

737 PARK AVENUE ACQUISITION LLC, Plaintiff/Counterclaim def, v. BARRY SHALOV DEFENDANTS/ COUNTERCLAIM PLAINTIFFS. BARRY SHALOV Third-Part plf-ap, v. KATZ 737 CORPORATION, Third Party def-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal