Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Landlord & Tenant

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
October 28, 2009

Landlord May Decide How to Apply Defaulting Tenant's Payment

360 Motor Parkway LLC v. Mortgage Zone, Inc.

8/20/09, p. 30, col. 1

Supreme Ct., Suffolk Cty

(Pines, J.)

In an action for rent due and expenses, landlord sought a default judgment against tenant and summary judgment against subtenant. The court granted landlord's motion, holding that landlord could decide how to apply tenant's letter of credit to amounts due under the lease.

In 2006, landlord entered into a lease with tenant for 10 years and six months. The lease required tenant to remain liable for all rent due and all additional rent until the expiration of the lease, together with landlord's attorney's fees. The lease also required tenant to deliver to landlord a standby letter of credit for $850,000 to serve as security for tenant's performance of leasehold obligations. In February 2008, tenant sublet the premises to subtenant. A letter agreement provided that subtenant would assume all of the obligations of the original lease. The sublease, however, provided that subtenant could terminate the sublease if a specified condition occurred. That condition did occur, and subtenant terminated the sublease effective May 31, 2008. Subtenant, however, did not pay the May rent. Landlord brought this action against tenant and subtenant for rent and additional rent due, together with expenses and attorney's fees. Tenant defaulted, and subtenant contended that tenant's letter of credit should be applied to satisfy the obligation to pay May 2008 rent. Landlord sought a default judgment against tenant and summary judgment against subtenant for the amounts due under the sublease until its May 31 termination.

The court first noted landlord's right to a default judgment against tenant. In then granting landlord summary judgment against subtenant, the court started by observing that subtenant did not dispute that the terms of the sublease made it directly liable to landlord for unpaid rent, and does not dispute that it failed to pay $99,171.74 in rent for May 2008. The court then turned to tenant's argument that the $850,000 letter of credit should be applied to pay older debts before newer debts, and that the letter should be applied to pay the May 2008 rent before
tenant's obligations to pay subsequent rent for the remainder of the lease term. The court rejected the argument, holding that because tenant had not specified how the funds should be applied, landlord was free to decide whether to apply them first to older or newer debts. As a result, the court held that the letter of credit should be applied in a way most favorable to landlord. Because the letter would not be sufficient to compensate landlord for all losses resulting from the default, subtenant remains liable for the May 2008 rent.

Landlord May Decide How to Apply Defaulting Tenant's Payment

360 Motor Parkway LLC v. Mortgage Zone, Inc.

8/20/09, p. 30, col. 1

Supreme Ct., Suffolk Cty

(Pines, J.)

In an action for rent due and expenses, landlord sought a default judgment against tenant and summary judgment against subtenant. The court granted landlord's motion, holding that landlord could decide how to apply tenant's letter of credit to amounts due under the lease.

In 2006, landlord entered into a lease with tenant for 10 years and six months. The lease required tenant to remain liable for all rent due and all additional rent until the expiration of the lease, together with landlord's attorney's fees. The lease also required tenant to deliver to landlord a standby letter of credit for $850,000 to serve as security for tenant's performance of leasehold obligations. In February 2008, tenant sublet the premises to subtenant. A letter agreement provided that subtenant would assume all of the obligations of the original lease. The sublease, however, provided that subtenant could terminate the sublease if a specified condition occurred. That condition did occur, and subtenant terminated the sublease effective May 31, 2008. Subtenant, however, did not pay the May rent. Landlord brought this action against tenant and subtenant for rent and additional rent due, together with expenses and attorney's fees. Tenant defaulted, and subtenant contended that tenant's letter of credit should be applied to satisfy the obligation to pay May 2008 rent. Landlord sought a default judgment against tenant and summary judgment against subtenant for the amounts due under the sublease until its May 31 termination.

The court first noted landlord's right to a default judgment against tenant. In then granting landlord summary judgment against subtenant, the court started by observing that subtenant did not dispute that the terms of the sublease made it directly liable to landlord for unpaid rent, and does not dispute that it failed to pay $99,171.74 in rent for May 2008. The court then turned to tenant's argument that the $850,000 letter of credit should be applied to pay older debts before newer debts, and that the letter should be applied to pay the May 2008 rent before
tenant's obligations to pay subsequent rent for the remainder of the lease term. The court rejected the argument, holding that because tenant had not specified how the funds should be applied, landlord was free to decide whether to apply them first to older or newer debts. As a result, the court held that the letter of credit should be applied in a way most favorable to landlord. Because the letter would not be sufficient to compensate landlord for all losses resulting from the default, subtenant remains liable for the May 2008 rent.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.