The plain wording of the guaranty agreement provided that Forino was not to be a guarantor of the tenant's obligations under the lease, and that Forino would have no obligation or liability under the agreement if the tenant vacated the demised premises prior to default. It is undisputed that there was no holdover tenancy here, thus entitling Forino to summary dismissal (see Preamble Props. v Woodard Antiques Corp.,
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.
THIRTY-ONE CO. v. FORINO
35 A.D.3d 235 (2006)
827 N.Y.S.2d 111
THIRTY-ONE CO., Appellant-Respondent, v. LUIGI FORINO et al., Respondents-Appellants. THIRTY-ONE CO., Appellant, v. LUIGI FORINO et al., Respondents.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided December 12, 2006.
Decided December 12, 2006.
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.
