150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- Citation
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- Parent Document
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- Jurisdiction
- New York (state)
- Effective Date
- 2015-09-25
Other Sections in This Document (12)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
- 150 West End Owners Corp. v. Chestnut Holdings of N.Y. Inc., 49 Misc. 3d 1147 (2015)
Full Text
750 charsRespondent’s counterclaim for legal fees is unrelated because there is no statutory authority for respondent to recover legal fees in this commercial holdover proceeding and the lease does not provide for recovery of fees. Pursuant to Real Property Law § 234, attorney’s fees may be awarded, in appropriate circumstances, to a tenant who is a prevailing party in a controversy; however, Real Property Law § 234 is applicable only in the residential setting and not in the commercial context. (537 Greenwich LLC; 111 on 11 Realty Corp. v Norton, 191 Misc 2d 483, 486 [Civ Ct, Kings County 2002].) Accordingly, in the absence of a lease provision, this court is without jurisdiction to hear respondent’s counterclaim for legal fees, and it is stricken.