Case Study

The Importance of Being Modest as explained by Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

In this commercial holdover proceeding, the team at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.  represented a commercial tenant, who was in the midst of an altercation with his new landlord.  This new landlord possessed unlimited resources and was represented by a very large and prestigious firm.

The client had invested a substantial amount of money into the space and had a great relationship with the old owner—believing to remain in the space for the foreseeable future . However, due to a personal tragedy, the old owner decided to sell the building.

The new owner planned on converting the building into luxury condominiums and thus, began trying to evict the client by terminating the lease. The new owner claimed that the client’s use of space was in conflict with the lease agreement, thereby giving him grounds to end the lease. The client was uncertain about how to proceed, and sought out support from Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.

The attorneys swiftly sprang into action and contested the lease termination. The new landlord’s attorneys pressed that there was a building code violation. The lawyers at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. were able to stall the case by filing numerous motions—which gave the client time to fix the apparent violation. The attorneys then forced the case to trial.

Over the course of three days, various experts were called forth, by both sides, in order to substantiate whether the use of space actually complied with the lease agreement or not. Acknowledging the volatile nature of the case, the new landlord presented the client with a settlement offer of $1.7 million in order to vacate the space.

Although both sides urged the client to accept the offer, the client, desiring more money, decided to hold out, citing the judge’s statement that a decision would be reached in a month’s time. The team at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. advised the client that the judge’s statement was not binding, and due to the fact the judge was new, the actual time of which the decision would be met was unpredictable. The client, however, disregarded the attorneys’ counsel and refused to accept the settlement offer.

Unfortunately, as eight months passed and no decision was forthcoming, the client had no choice but to vacate the premises. The client had gone bankrupt because of their rent obligation, as they were unable to conduct business while under a lawsuit. Ultimately, the client walked away with only their security deposit. Had they been able to hold out longer, both parties’ attorneys believed our client would have won.

This case illuminates how important it is to listen to your attorneys and remember that they have your best interests in mind. The team at Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. was aggressive in it’s advocacy for the client, however, the client refrained from taking their seasoned counsel; and as a result, walked away with essentially nothing.

Christopher Halligan and Israel Katz of Adam Leitman Bailey represented the business owner in this matter.

Back to case studies