Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
171 No. Pascack Road Corp., Appellant, v. A Nu U Injectables, LLC, Respondent.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs, and, upon searching the record, summary judgment is awarded to tenant dismissing the petition.
In this commercial holdover proceeding, landlord moved for summary judgment based on its termination of the lease on the ground that tenant had failed to cure certain violations within the cure period provided by the notice to cure. Tenant opposed the motion arguing, among other things, that the predicate notices were defective in that they were vague and failed to inform tenant how it had violated the lease or of the conduct that would be required to prevent eviction. By order entered February 29, 2024, the Justice Court (Leslie Kahn, J.) denied landlord's motion on the ground that material issues of fact precluded an award of summary judgment.
Here, the notices were unreasonably vague under the attendant circumstances (see Oxford Towers Co., LLC v Leites, 41 AD3d 144 [2007]; Hughes v Lenox Hill Hosp., 226 AD2d 4 [1996]) and, thus, were insufficient to permit tenant to prepare a defense. Contrary to landlord's argument on appeal, the bare denial by the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Paul I. Marx, J.), of an application for a Yellowstone injunction made by A Nu U Injectables, LLC, tenant herein, in a separate plenary action against it and its principal, does not preclude tenant's argument in the instant case regarding the facial insufficiency of the predicate notices (see PS Food Corp. v Granville Payne Retail, LLC (45 Misc 3d 1216[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 51601[U] [Sup Ct, Kings County 2014], affd 140 AD3d 1046 [2016]).
As it is proper to dismiss the petition under these circumstances (see Chinatown Apts. v Chu Cho Lam, 51 NY2d 786 [1980]), we search the record and award tenant summary judgment dismissing the petition (see CPLR 3212 [b]; Merritt Hill Vineyards v Windy Hgts. Vineyard, 61 NY2d 106 [1984]).
Accordingly, the order is affirmed, and, upon searching the record, summary judgment is awarded to tenant dismissing the petition.
WALSH, J.P. and GOLDBERG-VELAZQUEZ, J., concur.
CONWAY, J., taking no part.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: July 29, 2025
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 2024-370 RO C
Decided: July 29, 2025
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)