Winfield Capital Corp. v. Mahopac Auto Glass, Inc.

Balletta, J., dissents, and votes to reverse the order appealed from, on the law, to grant the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, and to deny the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment, with the following memorandum:

The majority finds that the defendants never had an obligation to pay the additional rent. I disagree.

Pursuant to a lease effective February 1, 1980, the defendant Mahopac Auto Glass, Inc. (hereinafter Mahopac) leased certain real property from Key Petroleum Corporation (hereinafter Key). The lease was to expire on January 31, 1990, but had an optional five-year…