Opinion
2011-12-20
ANOTHER SLICE, INC., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. 3620 BROADWAY INVESTORS LLC, Defendant–Respondent.
Novick, Edelstein, Lubell, Reisman, Wasserman & Leventhal, P.C., Yonkers (Lawrence Schiro of counsel), for appellant. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., New York (Jeffrey R. Metz of counsel), for respondent.
Novick, Edelstein, Lubell, Reisman, Wasserman & Leventhal, P.C., Yonkers (Lawrence Schiro of counsel), for appellant. Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C., New York (Jeffrey R. Metz of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling–Cohan, J.), entered September 27, 2010, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, in this dispute between plaintiff commercial tenant and defendant landlord, dismissed the action without prejudice to the parties' right to assert their claims and defenses in the Housing Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the complaint reinstated.
We agree with both parties that the court properly granted a Yellowstone injunction ( see First Natl. Stores v. Yellowstone Shopping Ctr., 21 N.Y.2d 630, 290 N.Y.S.2d 721, 237 N.E.2d 868 [1968] ), and that dismissal was improper. Gold–Land, Inc. v. Haskell, 248 A.D.2d 132, 669 N.Y.S.2d 804 (1998), on which the court relied, presents the opposite factual scenario and gives no support for dismissal. In Gold–Land, dismissal was appropriate because Supreme Court denied Yellowstone relief.