The evidence fairly interpreted supports the trial court's finding that the period allotted defendant, a storefront retail tenant since 1979, to construct a new storefront under the parties' Lease Extension Agreement would have been sufficient but for the time lost because of plaintiff landlord's unreasonable demands. Those demands, first raised six months after the agreement was entered into, were that the storefront design reflect the history and the "rhythm" of plaintiff...
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.
