WILLIAM RAND, RUTH ALPERT, AND ESTHER EVANS (AS SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO THE ESTATE OF MERNA ALPERT), ANDRE J. JAGENDORF, RICHARD READ AND WILLIAM C. RAND, pet-land-res, v. BEDFORD HOTEL, INC., res-ten-app, -and- AVENUE S RESTAURANT CORP. d/b/a FAGIOLINI AND “XYZ CORP.,” res

15-138. WILLIAM RAND, RUTH ALPERT, AND ESTHER EVANS (AS SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO THE ESTATE OF MERNA ALPERT), ANDRE J. JAGENDORF, RICHARD READ AND WILLIAM C. RAND, pet-land-res, v. BEDFORD HOTEL, INC., res-ten-app, -and- AVENUE S RESTAURANT CORP. d/b/a FAGIOLINI AND "XYZ CORP.," res — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Appeal from order (Debra Rose Samuels, J.), dated May 21, 2014, deemed an appeal from the ensuing final judgment (same court and Judge), entered May 30, 2014, and so considered (see CPLR 5520[c]), final judgment affirmed, with $25 costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

15-138. WILLIAM RAND, RUTH ALPERT, AND ESTHER EVANS (AS SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO THE ESTATE OF MERNA ALPERT), ANDRE J. JAGENDORF, RICHARD READ AND WILLIAM C. RAND, pet-land-res, v. BEDFORD HOTEL, INC., res-ten-app, -and- AVENUE S RESTAURANT CORP. d/b/a FAGIOLINI AND “XYZ CORP.,” res — Ordered that the motion is granted to the extent of granting appellant leave to appeal as a poor person. Seymour W. James, Jr., Esq., of the Legal Aid Society, Criminal Appeals Bureau (199 Water Street, 3rd Floor, NY, NY 10038, tel# 212 577-3688) is assigned as counsel for the appellant to prosecute the appeal and to serve without compensation. So Order — Appeal from order (Debra Rose Samuels, J.), dated May 21, 2014, deemed an appeal from the ensuing final judgment (same court and Judge), entered May 30, 2014, and so considered (see CPLR 5520[c]), final judgment affirmed, with $25 costs.

We sustain the grant of landlord’s motion for summary judgment on its claim to recover use and occupancy for the period tenant remained in possession of the subject premises. Landlord met its initial burden by submitting evidence establishing the amount of rent due under the parties’ commercial lease agreement for the three-month period in question (see Mushlam, Inc. v. Nazor, 80 AD3d 471, 472 [2011]), including amounts for “Basic Net Rent,” “Percentage Rental” and “Additional Percentage Rental,” as those terms are defined in the agreement. In opposition, tenant failed to raise any triable issue and, indeed, did not refute landlord’s calculations or offer any evidence as to reasonable value. Nor was a triable issue as to reasonable value raised by tenant’s bare, conclusory allegations that landlord purportedly received assets upon taking over tenant’s hotel business, such as reservations made before tenant vacated the premises.

WILLIAM RAND, RUTH ALPERT, AND ESTHER EVANS (AS SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO THE ESTATE OF MERNA ALPERT), ANDRE J. JAGENDORF, RICHARD READ AND WILLIAM C. RAND, pet-land-res, v. BEDFORD HOTEL, INC., res-ten-app, -and- AVENUE S RESTAURANT CORP. d/b/a FAGIOLINI AND “XYZ CORP.,” res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal