Plaintiff's allegations are sufficient to show that its failure to timely exercise its right of first refusal did not prejudice sellers, could result in a substantial forfeiture and should be excused because, upon learning that sellers had granted a right of first refusal to another tenant whose lease preexisted plaintiff's and who had exercised the right, plaintiff reasonably believed that its own right was illusory (see J.N.A. Realty Corp. v Cross Bay Chelsea,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
BAKERHOOD, INC. v. S.E. & K. CORP.
7 A.D.3d 397 (2004)
776 N.Y.S.2d 471
BAKERHOOD, INC., Respondent, v. S.E.&K. CORP. ET AL., Appellants.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
May 18, 2004.
May 18, 2004.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
