Matter of Aryeh Realty Corp. v. 18 E. 69th St Tenant, LLC

2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 06783 (Supreme Court of the State of New York Appellate Division First Department 2025) · Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, First Department · December 4, 2025 · No. Index No. 570353/24; Appeal No. 5229; Case No. 2025-01286

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department, modified and remanded an order concerning an alleged oral modification of a commercial lease. The court upheld findings that the parties agreed to a $15,000 monthly rent reduction and that performance unequivocally referable to the modification satisfied the applicable requirements. It also upheld the denial of attorneys' fees to the petitioner but remanded for a determination of how the tenant's admitted breach affected the amounts owed.

Holdings

  1. The record supported the finding that the parties orally agreed to reduce the tenant's monthly rent by $15,000.
  2. The oral rent modification was valid because the parties' performance unequivocally referred to and confirmed the oral modification, despite the modification's incompatibility with the lease as written.
  3. The court declined to consider the landlord's arguments concerning consideration for the rent reduction and the tenant's lack of detrimental reliance because those arguments were not presented to Civil Court.
  4. The landlord did not prevail on the central issue litigated and therefore was not entitled to recover attorneys' fees.
  5. Remand was required for a determination of the extent to which the admitted breach of Article 45 of the lease affected the monies owed to the landlord.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the parties orally modified the lease to reduce the tenant's monthly rent by $15,000.
  2. Whether performance unequivocally referable to the oral modification confirmed the modification despite its inconsistency with the written lease.
  3. Whether the landlord's arguments concerning consideration and detrimental reliance could be considered when they were not raised in Civil Court.
  4. Whether the landlord was entitled to recover attorneys' fees based on the result of the proceeding.
  5. Whether remand was required to determine the effect of the tenant's admitted breach of Article 45 on monies owed to the landlord.

Disposition

remanded

Cases Cited (6)

  • Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490, 495 (1992)(followed)
  • Paramount Leasehold, L.P. v 43rd St. Deli, Inc., 136 AD3d 563, 568 (1st Dept 2016), lv denied and dismissed 28 NY3d 1024 (2016)(followed)
  • National Interstate Ins. Co. v Interstate Indem. Co., 215 AD3d 593, 595 (1st Dept 2023)(followed)
  • Twitchell Tech. Prods. v Mechoshade Sys., LLC, 227 AD3d 45, 55-56 (2d Dept 2024)(followed)
  • Excelsior 57th Corp. v Winters, 227 AD2d 146, 147 (1st Dept 1996)(followed)
  • Matter of Wiederhorn v Merkin, 98 AD3d 859, 863 (1st Dept 2012), lv denied 20 NY3d 855 (2012)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…