a matter of law. Defendants assert that Frank Agrama signed the lease in his individual capacity,
not in his fiduciary capacity as Trustee, and that Olfet Ahmed Agrama never signed the leases at
all. However, the Trustees submit affidavits stating, in essence, that Frank Agrama signed the
lease in his capacity as Trustee (see Frank Agrama Affid, supra); that Olfet
Agrama was aware of, and consented to, the terms of the lease (see Olfet Agrama Affid,
supra); and that she granted Frank Agrama authority to execute the lease on her behalf
(id.).
As Frank Agrama, a Trustee, is authorized to sign the lease, his signature as it appears on the
lease is sufficient (see Kesselman v
London Paint & Wallpaper Co., Inc., 54 Misc 3d 639, 642 [Civ Ct, NY County
2016]). Furthermore, co-Trustee Olfet Agrama is permitted, after exercising her own judgment
and discretion, to authorize an agent to carry it into execution (see Gates v Dudgeon, 173
NY 426, 430 [1903]). Frank Agrama, being authorized by Olfet Agrama, his signing binds both
(see Roe v Smith, 42 Misc 89, 90 [Sup Ct, Orange County1903]). In addition, Olfet
Agrama's acknowledgement of the lease, and her acceptance of its benefits of lease without
protest, amount to ratification of the lease, even if it once was voidable (see Anderson v
Conner, 43 Misc 384, 388 [Surr Ct, NY County, App Term 1904]). As such, the First Lease,
as executed by Frank Agrama, is satisfactory.
Furthermore, contrary to defendants' position, as the Trust is an express trust, the Trustees
have standing to bring this action in their own names (see CPLR 1004; Trustees of the
Plumbers Local Union No. 1 Additional Sec. Ben. Fund v City of New York, 2009 WL
497306 [Sup Ct, NY County (Madden, J.), Feb. 13, 2019]).