AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

PETER BOZEWICZ, A/K/A PIOTR BOZEWICZ, ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. NASH METALWARE CO., INC., ET AL., APPELLANTS.

ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law, by (1) deleting the provision thereof granting the plaintiffs' motion and substituting therefor a provision denying the motion, and (2) deleting the provision thereof denying that branch of the cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover treble damages pursuant to RPAPL 853 on behalf of the plaintiff Peter Bozewicz, a/k/a Piotr Bozewicz, and substituting therefor a provision granting that branch of the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

A landlord may peaceably re-enter commercial premises and regain possession pursuant to a right reserved in the lease if the tenant breaches its obligation to pay rent (see, Matter of 110-45 Queens Blvd. Garage v. Park Briar Owners, 265 A.D.2d 415; Matter of Jovana Spaghetti House v. Heritage Co. of Massena, 189 A.D.2d 1041; Cohen v. Carpenter, 128 App. Div. 862). Here, there is a dispute as to whether the tenant, the plaintiff Powerfeed Mfg., Inc. (hereinafter Powerfeed), had paid the rent due under the lease at the time of the eviction. Accordingly, Powerfeed is not entitled to summary judgment on the issue of liability, since it cannot be determined as a matter of law whether the defendants, who admitted to locking out the tenant, acted lawfully.

The defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing so much of the complaint as sought to recover treble damages pursuant to RPAPL 853 on behalf of the plaintiff Peter Bozewicz, a/k/a Piotr Bozewicz, since he was not a party to the lease (see, CPLR 3212[b]; Gold v. Schuster, 264 A.D.2d 547, 550).

The defendants' remaining contention is without merit.

SANTUCCI, J.P., ALTMAN, FLORIO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BOZEWICZ, v. NASH METALWARE CO., INC
(Jun 4, 2001)