Shutterstock
When parties are litigating over money, the question of who gets to hold the contested funds while the dispute is pending is often critical. This can become especially complicated in litigation over a commercial tenant’s rent obligations where a Yellowstone injunction is involved. In such cases, much will depend upon the nature of the underlying dispute—and, in particular, the reasons why the tenant is not paying. A close examination of the case law shows why.
Background
A Yellowstone injunction—so named for the case out of which the concept arose, First Nat’l Stores, Inc. v. Yellowstone Shopping Ctr., Inc., 21 N.Y.2d 630 (1968)—is a species of preliminary injunction available to a commercial tenant whose landlord issues a notice of default and threatens to terminate the lease if the default is not cured within a certain period of time. It permits a commercial tenant that is able to cure the alleged default but disputes whether it should have to do so to toll the time to cure in order to obtain a court ruling on the issue. The tolling preserves the tenant’s ability to cure the default (and thus avoid termination of the lease) if the court ultimately rules in the landlord’s favor.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
