From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Madison Murray Associates v. Perlbinder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 11, 1995
215 A.D.2d 204 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 11, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.).


While we do not subscribe in every respect to the IAS Court's construction of the lease, particularly its determination that statutory tenancies are not encumbrances as a matter of law, we agree with its conclusion that to interpret the appraisal provision as not requiring consideration of statutory tenancies would result in an inflated valuation making the annual renewal rental nearly three times the net lessee's income from the building, thereby rendering the renewal option illusory, and is plainly unreasonable.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Ross, Williams and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Madison Murray Associates v. Perlbinder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 11, 1995
215 A.D.2d 204 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Madison Murray Associates v. Perlbinder

Case Details

Full title:MADISON MURRAY ASSOCIATES, Respondent, v. BARTON M. PERLBINDER et al.…

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

Date published: May 11, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 204 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
626 N.Y.S.2d 180

Citing Cases

Textron Financial-New Jersey Inc. v. Herring Land Group

Other New York cases indicate statutory tenancies may be considered, depending on the wording of the lease.…

Overnight Partners v. Gordon

For example, in Plaza Hotel Assocs. v Wellington Assocs. ( supra), Supreme Court rejected the appraisers'…