In finding that plaintiff was entitled to rescission of its lease pursuant to Real Property Law § 223-a, the court overlooked the language of the lease that specifically excepted that statute, and provided that, in the event that defendant was unable to deliver possession, plaintiff was entitled to a rent abatement and not the cancellation of the lease. Accordingly, plaintiff's abandonment of the premises upon learning that a prior tenant claimed legal title thereto...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
