without seeking to avoid the lease. "It is well settled in this State that where, as in the case at bar,
one party has received the full benefit of an ultra vires contract, it cannot plead the
invalidity of the contract to defeat an action upon it by the other party" (Washington Hgts.
Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v Brooklyn Fur Stor. [*8]Corp.,
5 Misc 2d 997, 998-999 [Sup Ct, King's County 1957]). Thus, the branch of the motion that
seeks summary judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint is denied.
Defendants also submit copies of an email exchange with nonparty Jehan Agrama, the
Trustees' son (Dep. Tr., Jehan Agrama, NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 39, 40), in which, defendants assert,
they accepted an offer of early termination without penalty (see Emails, NYSCEF Doc.
Nos. 43, 44). Thus, defendants insist that they are entitled to the return of their security deposit.
However, the request for the return of the security deposit is inextricably intertwined with the
underlying lease agreement, thereby precluding an award of summary judgment on that issue (see Black Bear Fuel Oil, Ltd. v Swan Lake
Dev., LLC, 128 AD3d 1191, 1194 [4th Dept 2015]).
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment is denied; and it is further
ORDERED that the cross motion is granted to the extent that the caption is amended to
conform to the proper legal name of the Owner, as set forth in the Deed, and the motion is
otherwise denied.
DATE 6/30/2020
ROBERT R. REED, J.S.C.