[plaintiff] because of a Lease default by [plaintiff]; (ii) in "defending lawsuits brought
against [defendant] because of [plaintiff's] actions." (NYSCEF No. 65 at 4 ¶ 19 [a]
[5].)
Defendant asserts that this provision requires reimbursement of fees "incurred in
enforcing the lease or defending against Plaintiff's claims." (NYSCEF No. 63 at ¶
39.) The language at issue does not apply to litigation of claims brought by plaintiff
against defendant. (See NYSCEF No. 70 at ¶¶ 19-22 [plaintiff's reply
aff.].) Rather, the Appellate Division has held, interpreting an identical lease provision,
that this language "grants the landlord the right to seek legal fees where it has been
obliged to defend against lawsuits brought by third parties against the landlord as
a result of the tenant's acts." (Flynn v Red Apple 670 Pac. St., 209 AD3d 580, 581 [1st
Dept 2022] [emphasis added]; see also Kattan v 119 Christopher LLC, 2020 NY
Slip Op 51469[U], at *2-3 & n 2 [Sup Ct, NY County 2020] [same].)
Defendant is thus not entitled under the lease to recover attorney fees incurred in
defending plaintiff's claims against it. That leaves, at most, the fees incurred in litigating
defendant's counterclaim against plaintiff for unpaid rent.[FN4]
To be entitled to those fees, defendant must show that it has prevailed "on the central
claims advanced" and "receive[d] substantial relief in consequence thereof." (Board of Mgrs. of 55 Walker St.
Condominium v Walker St., 6 AD3d 279, 280 [1st Dept 2004].) Defendant has
not satisfied these requirements here.
As tried to the jury, defendant claimed that plaintiff's breach of the lease caused
defendant four different categories of damages: unpaid rent for the month that tenant