As the IAS Court correctly stated, an assignment does not release the assignor of its obligations under the assigned contract (Rosenthal Paper Co. v. National Folding Box Paper Co., 226 N.Y. 313, 326), absent an express agreement to that effect or one that can be implied from facts other than the other contracting party's mere consent to the assignment (185 Madison Assocs. v. Ryan, 174 A.D.2d 461). Here, defendant's claim that he was released from paying rent under the lease with plaintiffs' decedent, which he assigned to his wholly owned corporation is based on an incorrect reading of the pertinent lease provisions and on inadequately pleaded and unproven allegations of deceit, all of which the IAS Court properly rejected. Nor does defendant show that the lease is unconscionable either substantively or procedurally (see, Gillman v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 73 N.Y.2d 1, 10-14), and his cause is not furthered by his failure to have read it before signing (see, Chemical Bank v. Masters, 176 A.D.2d 591, 591-592).
We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.