Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)

Citation
Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
Parent Document
Qureshi v. Fiske Capital Management, Inc., 59 Mass. App. Ct. 463 (2003)
Jurisdiction
Massachusetts (state)
Effective Date
2003-09-30

Other Sections in This Document (22)

Full Text

855 chars
Qureshi claims tenant status under the original 1984 lease, as extended. That lease, however, as we have seen, expired on July 31, 1999. Qureshi, assisted by counsel, had made commercial demands for the next extension period that, to the extent any ambiguities may have attended the meaning of Qureshi’s earlier letter of “renewal” (and we do not so decide) unmistakably converted the state of negotiations to horse trading about a new lease. When those ended, the negotiations were in an imperfect state. Neither party was bound. See Rosenfield v. United States Trust Co., 290 Mass. 210, 216-217 (1935). Compare Situation Mgmt. Sys., Inc. v. Malouf, Inc., 430 Mass. 875, 878-879 (2000). When a tenant has the benefit of an option to extend, the tenant initiates negotiation of new business points at peril that the negotiations will not end in agreement.