We use cookies to provide you with a better experience. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy.
What Happened: In 1993, a tenant signed a lease to operate a tanning salon at a strip mall. The agreement included a third-party guaranty. The lease was amended in 1994 and again in 1996. In each case, the guarantors signed the amendments. In 1999, the sides executed a third amendment making significant changes to the original 1993 lease, including moving the tanning salon to another location owned by the landlord.
What Happened: A landlord and tenant sign a three-year lease on a parcel of real estate containing three garage bays for use as an auto repair shop. Soon after the tenant opens for business, citizens complain about the lack of parking near one of the bays. The city investigates and discovers a 30-year-old ordnance unique to the property ordering the owner to seal one of the bays. The tenant closes and seals the third service bay just to be cautious. The landlord, who was unaware of the ordnance, offers the tenant a rent reduction.
What Happened: A lease required the tenant that would occupy 45 percent of the space in a four-story building to pay 42.98 percent of the taxes on the property. The agreement contained a tax escalation clause requiring the tenant to pay the proportionate share of tax increases on the building. The landlord later added seven floors of new residential space, turning the premises into an 11-story mixed-use building carrying a much higher tax.
What Happened: A tenant assigned its lease for commercial office space in Texas to its corporate sibling. The landlord and new tenant then amended the terms of the original lease. After evicting the new tenant for nonpayment of rent, the landlord sued the old tenant for the new tenant’s violation of the lease amendments. The old tenant denied responsibility for the breaches since the amendments were made after it assigned the lease and without its signature or consent.
What Happened: Blockages in sewer pipelines located outside the property caused a constant stream of sewer backups inside a tenant’s store. Eventually, the tenant decided that enough was enough and vacated the premises. When the landlord sued for unpaid rent, the tenant claimed that the sewer problems rendered the property untenantable and gave it the right to terminate the lease. The landlord denied responsibility for the sewer situation and moved for summary judgment.
Ruling: The Texas federal court denied the motion.
What Happened: An exterminator working for Best Buy suffered serious injury after slipping and falling in the store’s icy parking lot. He sued Best Buy and the landlord that owned the property for negligence. Best Buy denied responsibility for maintaining the parking lot in safe condition because the property was under the landlord’s control. So, it moved for summary judgment.
Ruling: The Connecticut court granted the motion and dismissed the victim’s case against Best Buy without a trial.
What Happened: An Italian restaurant tried to assign its lease to a steakhouse, but the landlord refused and served notice of termination. The tenant denied committing any lease violation and asked the court to issue a temporary injunction barring the landlord from terminating the lease until the merits of the case were decided.
Ruling: The New York court granted the temporary injunction.
What Happened: A studio owner entered into a “License Agreement” giving a production company “the exclusive,” but “non-possessory” right to use the property. The production company defaulted on its rent payment and the owner brought an “unlawful detainer”—that is, eviction—action seeking possession of the property.
What Happened: A construction materials tenant that admitted to not paying rent and abandoning the premises had no problem with the default judgment entered in the landlord’s favor but claimed that the sought-after award of 47 months’ rent was excessive, noting that the lease clearly defined its “Term” as: “Commencing on the ‘Commencement Date,’. .
What Happened: A restaurant subtenant admitted to defaulting on its obligation to pay rent and vacating the premises. But it objected to the $689,554.94 that the trial court awarded because the landlord didn’t mitigate its damages by seeking to relet the space to another tenant. We have no duty to mitigate, the landlord countered, citing the following lease provision:
RSS