South Brooklyn Ry. Co. v. Heung Man Lau, 2024 NY Slip Op 24139 (2024)

Citation: South Brooklyn Ry. Co. v. Heung Man Lau, 2024 NY Slip Op 24139 (2024)
Parent Document: South Brooklyn Ry. Co. v. Heung Man Lau, 2024 NY Slip Op 24139 (2024)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2024-05-07
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/9500911/south-brooklyn-ry-co-v-heung-man-lau/ ↗

Full Text

1,498 chars

First, Petitioner served a notice to quit on April 28, 2022 that required Respondent to vacate by June 3, 2022. The petition references the notice to quit and follow up stipulations as the predicate notice for bringing this action (see petition ¶ 5). However, Petitioner abandoned its April 28, 2022 notice to quit through a series of follow up stipulations wherein it agreed to extend two principal terms: the deadline to vacate and the areas that the notice was intended to recover. Specifically, in a stipulation dated June 3, 2022 (see Miller aff, exhibit 3; hereinafter, "June 3, 2022 Stipulation") the parties acknowledged that, "[n]otwithstanding the Notice of Termination, Licensor hereby agrees that with respect to the parking areas, the License shall remain in full force, and all obligations of Licensee under the License shall remain in full force and effect through and including 11:50 p.m. June 30, 2022 . . . . Accordingly, as of the Extended Vacate Date, the License as to the Parking Areas will be terminated pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Notice of Termination." Thus, the June 3, 2022 Stipulation by its own terms abandoned the notice to quit by changing the terms of the notice (i.e., what is actually being terminated) and, therefore, equivocating on the terms Petitioner now seeks to enforce. The Court finds that the notice to quit cannot serve as a proper predicate notice to bringing this summary proceeding because it was not clear and unequivocal.

Other Sections in This Document (70)

Full Text