159 MP Corp. v. Redbridge Bedford LLC

• Decision Date: 29 January 2015
• Docket Number: Index No. 4599/14
• Parties: 159 MP CORP., et ano., Plaintiffs, v. REDBRIDGE BEDFORD LLC, Defendant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

2015 NY Slip Op 32817(U)

159 MP CORP., et ano., Plaintiffs,
v.
REDBRIDGE BEDFORD LLC, Defendant.

Index No. 4599/14

New York Supreme Court

January 29, 2015

At an IAS Term, Part Comm-2 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of Kings, at the Courthouse, at Civic Center, Brooklyn, New York, on the 29^th day of January, 2015

PRESENT: HON. DAVID I. SCHMIDT, Justice.

The following papers numbered 1 to 11 read herein:

	Papers Numbered
Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause/; Petition/Cross Motion and; Affidavits (Affirmations) Annexed	1-4, 5-7
Opposing Affidavits (Affirmations)	8-9, 10-11
Reply Affidavits (Affirmations)	12
__________Affidavit (Affirmation)	__________
Other Papers	__________

Upon the foregoing papers, plaintiffs 159 MP Corp. and 240 Bedford Ave Realty Holding Corp. move, by way of order to show cause, for a Yellowstone injunction enjoining defendant Redbridge Bedford LLC from taking any action to terminate plaintiffs'

Page 2

commercial lease and evict plaintiffs from the subject premises. Defendant cross-moves for an order, pursuant to CPLR 3212, granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

On April 7, 2010, plaintiffs entered into two leases with defendant's predecessor, BFN Realty Associates LLC, for adjoining commercial spaces in the subject property at 159 North 3^rd Street a/k/a 241Bedford Avenue a/k/a 160 North 4^th Street in Brooklyn. Plaintiffs used combined spaces to operate a supermarket. On or about March 12, 2014, defendant sent plaintiffs a Notice to Cure, wherein defendant alleges the following violations of the leases and riders attached thereto:

1. In violation of paragraphs 3,6 and 8 of the Lease the tenant has built out the premises without obtaining any permits or approval from the Department of Buildings.

2. In violation of paragraph 3 of the Lease, tenant built the premises store without obtaining any Department of Buildings permits. The work included but was not limited to plumbing for various refrigerators and compressors, electrical work, cooking equipment including gas lines, sprinklers and HVAC installation. Landlord hereby demands that tenant cure this default, obtain all plans and perform all work to comply with all department of Buildings rules and regulations.

3. The configuration of the Premises Store is in violation of egress requirements under paragraph 6 of the Lease and poses an immediate danger to employees and customers and tenants of the building. The configuration is also a fire hazard. To cure these violations tenant must obtain all plans and perform all work to comply with all Department of Buildings rules and regulations.

4. Tenant has illegally and in violation of paragraph 6 of the Lease combined premises in the current store configuration. You must immediately reduce the size of the premises.

Page 3

5. You currently vent all cooking equipment through a black iron vent attached to a wall adjacent to the Leased premises. This is a nuisance and is in violation of paragraph 63 of the Lease. In order to cure this violation, you must remove the vent system.

6. In violation of paragraph 63 of the Lease, tenant vents all cooking fumes through an illegal system which violated paragraph 63 of the Lease. Tenant must immediately remove this venting system. The compressors cause noise and vibrations which interfere with the comfort and safety of other tenants of the premises. In order to cure this violation, you must remove the compressors.

7. You have failed to provide access to the sprinkler system to the Fire Department for inspections. This is a violation under paragraphs 6 and 8 of the Lease.

In the Notice to Cure, defendant informed plaintiffs that if they failed to cure the alleged breaches on or before March 27, 2014, defendant will elect to terminate plaintiffs' tenancy and commence summary proceedings to recover possession of the leased premises.

Plaintiffs thereafter commenced this proceeding on March 26, 2014 by way of order to show cause seeking a Yellowstone injunction. In addition to injunctive relief,...