Graham Court Owner's Corp. v. Kyle Taylor, 24 N.Y.3d 742 (2015)

Citation: Graham Court Owner's Corp. v. Kyle Taylor, 24 N.Y.3d 742 (2015)
Parent Document: Graham Court Owner's Corp. v. Kyle Taylor, 24 N.Y.3d 742 (2015)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2015-02-19
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2780292/graham-court-owners-corp-v-kyle-taylor/ ↗

Full Text

1,401 chars

Thus, clause D. (3) anticipates that after a tenant's default
leads to the reletting of the premises, the landlord is entitled
to collect attorneys' fees incurred in gaining possession.    Under
these circumstances, clause D. (3) complies with the requirements
of Real Property Law § 234 that the lease provide "in any action
or summary proceeding" for the landlord's recovery of attorneys'
fees "incurred as the result of the failure of the tenant to
perform any covenant or agreement contained in such lease."
          The landlord argues that the lease is outside the
coverage of Real Property Law § 234 because under clause D. (3)
the landlord may collect attorneys' fees from rents received by
rerenting the premises to another tenant, and not from the
original defaulting tenant as fees incurred in an action for the
tenant's violations of the lease.   In essence the landlord seeks
to distinguish the attorneys' fees provision on two grounds: the
fees permitted under the lease constitute costs for reletting of
the premises and not for litigating the tenant's breach; and the
amount recouped as fees is applied as an offset of the amount
owed by the tenant, and thus serves to beneficially mitigate the
tenant's debt.   We find unpersuasive these arguments which seek
to avoid the application of Real Property Law § 234 by ignoring
the terms of paragraph 15, and the practical implications of

Other Sections in This Document (34)

Full Text