Respondent now moves for an order granting a judgment in the amount of the security deposit, to wit, $21,000 with interest from June 11, 1990. In addition, respondent is seeking attorney's fees in having to make this motion to enforce this provision of the stipulation.
According to the lease agreement dated June 11, 1990, paragraphs 31 and 92, and the modification of the lease agreement dated October 24, 1994, paragraph 4, the parties or their respective predecessors in interest, agreed that the security deposit for the premises was set at $21,000, would remain fixed at that amount for the remainder of the lease term, and would be returned to the tenant upon the expiration of the lease, provided the tenant fully complied with all of the lease's terms. Paragraph 31 further states that in the event of a sale of the building of which the leased premises forms a part, the owner/lessor has the right to transfer the security to the vendee and thereafter shall be released from liability to the tenant/lessee for the return of the security.
Additionally, the lease provides:
Successors and Assigns
39. The covenants, conditions and agreements contained in this lease shall bind and inure to the benefit of Owner and Tenant and their respective heirs, distributees, executors, administrators, successors, and except as otherwise provided in this lease, their assigns.
It is respondent's contention that petitioner, as a successor in interest to the original owner/lessor, is bound by the lease terms to return respondent's security deposit. Respondent does not, however, make any claim that petitioner ever received the security deposit from its predecessor(s) in interest.