ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY v. JUDGMENT

Similar documents
BAYSIDE PROPERTY MAINT., rivjt.}ul - q A II: 22 Plaintiff ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION v. TO DISMISS

Before the court are three motions: (1) plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings on

Before the court is a motion for summary judgment by defendants Nick Nappi

Before the court is a motion by plaintiff Peoples United Bank for summary

ORDER ON PLAINTIFFS' JOINT MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. The Plaintiffs in these consolidated cases have moved for summary judgment against

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff DECISION AND JUDGMENT v. ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT

::_~ Z': t: \ Plaintiff Irving Oil, Marketing, Inc., moves for partial summary judgment on its

~ \ '2 \~:) 2: ~ 'DOC.).<ET NO.. : AP ~,,\ "' ~fr,~-cum"-/d/i:lj~oo/ This case comes before the Court on Petitioners Jeanne M.

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S v. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BACKGROUND

HAMILTON MUNICIPAL COURT 345 HIGH STREET, HAMILTON, OHIO Hamiltonmunicipalcourt.org EVICTION PROCEDURE CLERK OF COURTS

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA

PROPOSED REVISION 1. Rule Time and Method of Appeal.

WB :.-,id- I. BEFORE THE COURT. Plaintiff SNIRT, Inc. filed a complaint for recoupment, conversion, negligent

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X ELIZABETH SAVARESE ind

IN THE THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, STATE OF UTAH COUNTY OF TOOELE, TOOELE DEPARTMENT

Building Serv. Local 32B-J Pension Fund v 101 L.P NY Slip Op 33111(U) March 12, 2013 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Melvin

Fifty E. Forty Second Co., LLC v 21st Century Offs. Inc NY Slip Op 32933(U) November 20, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

NO. COA NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 2 October 2012

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. No Filed July 30, 2014

This case comes before the Court on Defendant Nancy Dutton's Motion. for Summary Judgment, Defendant Van Meer and Belanger, PA and Kelly

Before the court is a motion by defendant Maine Standards Co., LLC to dismiss or

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO DISSOLVE ATTACHMENT

21 GCA REAL PROPERTY CH. 21 FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT. v. Case No. 5D

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE

Case: Document: 76-1 Page: 1 08/02/ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, 2011

Noto v Northeastern Fuel NY Inc NY Slip Op 31538(U) July 15, 2013 Sup Ct, Richmond County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: Joseph J.

N T E R f D NOV 2 R?01-4

Before this Court is Plaintiff Washington Mutual Bank, FA's (WAMu) motion for BACKGROUND

Foscarini, Inc. v Greenestreet Leasehold Partnership 2017 NY Slip Op 31493(U) July 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015

Ross Dress For Less Inc v. VIWY

governmental action pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80C. Following hearing, the petition is FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff, v. 11-CV-6483T. Defendants. INTRODUCTION. Plaintiff Joellen Petrillo ( Petrillo ) brings this action

ENTRY ORDER SUPREME COURT DOCKET NO JANUARY TERM, 2018 } APPEALED FROM: In the above-entitled cause, the Clerk will enter:

Weinberg Holdings LLC v Ruru & Assoc. LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 30402(U) February 25, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge:

RECEIVED AND FILED M~R S~~ERIC?R COURT. ,, 0V11 Action. OXFORD COUNlY SUPERIOR COURT SOUTH PARIS, MAINE. Plaintiff.

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 114,642 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. DIANE HANSHEW d/b/a H & G PROPERTIES, Appellant,

) mbeifana s /!fj_. Plaintiffs appeal from a decision by Defendant's, Council of the Town of

****THE SHERIFF S OFFICE MUST BE PAID BY CHECK OR MONEY ORDER. CASH IS NOT ACCEPTED.****

Plaintiff, DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. This matter is before the court on motions for summary judgment by both

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO LIMITED JURISDICTION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

- '~~(~7 ~~',_CV -07~6~3" J

STATE OF MAINE MAR RECEIVED. Before the court is Plaintiff Mark Hider's SOB appeal of the City of Portland Planning

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, 2012

EVICTION PACKETS AVAILABLE ON LINE AT

LANDLORD AND TENANT FORMS AND INSTRUCTIONS

JUN 1 6 ~16. ANDRosco~GIN ) ) ) ) ) Before the court is Defendant William Maselli's motion for summary judgment

Before the court is defendants Margaret S. Marean and Erion H. Marean' s motion for

Chekowsky v Windermere Owners LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 31653(U) June 27, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: Milton A.

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

-rvw... cum- ~/ll'fm'3

Overview of Key Lease Provisions

INSTRUCTIONS. You must pay a filing fee when you file this complaint. If you do not, no action will be taken on your case.

STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS. (Filed: April 18, 2012)

Motion for Rehearing Denied May 14, 1986 COUNSEL

Case 7:17-cv Document 1 Filed 05/14/17 Page 1 of 11

EVICTION PACKETS AVAILABLE ON LINE AT

Williams Mullen, by Camden R. Webb, Esq. and Elizabeth C. Stone, Esq., for Plaintiff.

This case concerns an insurance claim made by plaintiff Kherallah Salleh with respect to

) ) ) ) ) Defendants Dominator Golf, LLC and Domenic Pugliares ( collectively "Dominator

Submitted October 12, 2017 Decided. Before Judges Alvarez and Nugent.

COMPEL ARBITRATION DENY MOTION TO COMPEL 2. ANOTHER TO COMPEL OR NOT TO COMPEL ARBITRATION CASE

FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER

AMl/---cMfVI-OCJ~ ~ t -!Y

Petition for Eviction Based on Non-Payment of Rent

v Nos ; Macomb Circuit Court PINEBROOK PLAZA, LLC, and KANAAN LC No CB FAMILY TRUST,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Mount Sinai Hosp. v 1998 Alexander Karten Annuity Trust 2013 NY Slip Op 31234(U) June 10, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Appellate Term Docket Number: Upon the annexed affidavit of, dated, 2, and the papers annexed thereto,

EVICTION CASE INSTRUCTIONS

Spektor v Caiati 2017 NY Slip Op 31076(U) May 16, 2017 Supreme Court, Kings County Docket Number: /13 Judge: Debra Silber Cases posted with a

STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY

UPDATED THROUGH SEPTEMBER 9, 2011 AMENDED RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD AND TENANT ACT (STATEWIDE)

California Eviction Defense:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ROME DIVISION

Peter R. Friedman, Ltd. v Tishman Speyer Hudson LP 2010 NY Slip Op 33806(U) March 18, 2010 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2009 Judge:

NOTICE OF SMALL CLAIM

2: JS Plaintiff ORDER ON DEFENDANT TOWN OF CASCO'S MOTION TO v. DISMISS

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE March 14, 2018 Session

RULES GOVERNING THE COURTS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY RULE 6:4. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE TRIAL

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

International Guaranties

Before the court is plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in an action for foreclosure

ORDER ON MOTION TO DISMISS. STATE OF MAINE Cumberla nd ss Clerk 's Office. Before the court is defendant Town of Windham's motion to dismiss plaintiff

Case 6:14-cv CEM-TBS Document 31 Filed 01/16/15 Page 1 of 10 PageID 1331

1-800-Flowers.Com, Inc. v 220 Fifth Realty LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 33044(U) November 29, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018

Defendant in the above case has moved to dismiss, arguing that he cannot be

United Systems Access, Inc., brought this third-party action against defendant

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT July Term 2013

Zloop, Inc. v. Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein, LLP, 2018 NCBC 39.

IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO. PICKERINGTON PLAZA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Plaintiff, : Case No. 10 CV 1235

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/15/ :02 PM INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 302 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/15/2017

Mack-Cali Realty Corp. v NGM Ins. Co NY Slip Op 33719(U) January 16, 2013 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 50233/2012 Judge: Sam D.

Waterfalls Italian Cuisine, Inc. v Tamarin 2013 NY Slip Op 33299(U) March 22, 2013 Sup Ct, Richmond County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Philip

RECEIVED v. Docket No. PORSC-CV

IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR JOHNSON COUNTY

Transcription:

STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT. CUMBERLAND, ss. CIVIL ACTION // DOCKET NO: CV~09-156\.. SOLEY WHARF, LLC Plaintiff ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY v. JUDGMENT HARBORVIEW INVESTMENTS, LLC, Defendant. Plaintiff Soley Wharf, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 56(a) is before the Court. Defendant Harborview Investments, LLC requests that summary judgment be issued against the moving party pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 56(c). The parties contest the interpretation of a lease provision governing holdover tenants. Because the plaintiff drafted the ambiguous provision, it must be construed in the defendant's favor. The plaintiff's Motion is therefore denied, and summary judgment is granted for the defendant. BACKGROUND Soley Wharf, LLC (Plaintiff), owns and manages commercial property at 100 Commercial Street in Portland, Maine. On March 30,2004, Harborview Investments, LLC (Defendant) entered a written lease for space in the 100 Commercial Street property. Plaintiff drafted the lease. Originally the lease was to expire in 2006, but the parties extended it to run until January 31,2009. In mid-2008 the parties began to discuss renewing the lease for another term, but they could not reach an agreement. On December 30,2008, Defendant 1

gave Plaintiff written notice of its intent to terminate the lease on January 31, 2009, and hold over for two months pursuant to the ninth paragraph of the lease. On January 26, 2009, Plaintiff responded with a letter informing Defendant that it must vacate the premises by January 31, 2009. Defendant remained in possession, and on February 2, 2009 Plaintiff hand-delivered a letter to Defendant declaring that the lease had been renewed for another year. Defendant ultimately vacated the premises before March 31, 2009. The ninth paragraph of the lease addresses holdover tenants. This holdover clause reads: If Tenant remains in possession of the Leased Premises after the expiration of the term of this Lease, such possession shall be as a month-to-month tenant. During such month-to-month tenancy, the provisions of this Lease shall be applicable, except that there shall be no extension options and except that rent shall be increased to one and one half (1.5) times the Base Rent for the period just preceding such termination. Landlord and Tenant may terminate any such month-tomonth tenancy by giving the other party thirty (30) days prior written notice. If Tenant remains in possession of the Premises, or any part thereof, after the termination of the term, such holding over shall, at the election of the Landlord expressed in a written notice to Tenant and not otherwise, constitute a renewal of this Lease for one year. On March 18, 2009 Plaintiff brought this action for declaratory judgment under 14 M.R.S.A. 5954, seeking to affirm its right to bind Defendant for another year under the lease. On April 29, 2009 Plaintiff filed this Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendant requests that the court render summary judgment against the moving party, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 56(c). DISCUSSION Summary judgment is proper where there is no genuine issue of material fact, entitling the moving party to judgment as a matter of law. M.R. Civ. P. 56(c); Levine v. R.B.K. Caly Corp., 2001 ME 77, <IT 4,770 A.2d 653, 655. Maine's 2

Declaratory Judgment Act empowers courts to determine the construction or validity of a contract on request. 14 M.R.S.A. 5954 (2009). Maine has long applied the rule of contra proferentem to construe ambiguous language against its drafter. Barrett v. McDonald Investments, Inc., 2005 ME 43, <]I 17, 870 A.2d 146, 150 (citing 11 Samuel Williston & Richard A. Lord, A Treatise on the Law of Contracts 32:12 at 471-72 (4th ed. 1999); Monk v. Morton, 139 Me. 291, 30 A.2d 17 (1943)). Plaintiff contends that the lease uses the terms "expiration" and "termination" interchangeably. Under Plaintiff's interpretation, when Defendant remained in possession of the leased premises on February I, 2009, the lease gave Plaintiff the option of either accepting rent on a month-to-month basis at 1.5 times the base rate, or of immediately renewing the lease for a period of one year. Defendant counters by insisting that the term "expiration" in the first sentence of the holdover provision refers to the natural end of the initial lease term, January 31,2009, while "termination" as used in the second through fourth sentences refers to the end of a month-to-month holdover period beyond the "expiration." Under Defendant's interpretation, the lease "expired" on January 31,2009, and Plaintiff had no right to renew the lease for another term until it gave 30-days' notice of the post-january 31st holdover period's "termination." Contract language is ambiguous if it is reasonably susceptible of two different meanings. See Ryder v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 2007 ME 146, <]I 11, 938 A.2d 4, 7. The lease does not clearly indicate whether the terms "expiration" and "termination" in the holdover provision are meant to be synonymous, as Plaintiff argues, or are distinct, as advanced by Defendant. Because both interpretations 3

are reasonable, the terms are ambiguous. Applying the rule of contra proferentem, the ambiguity must be resolved against Plaintiff as drafter of the lease, and in favor of Defendant. Defendant had the right to holdover in a month-to-month tenancy, and Plaintiff could not bind Defendant to another year absent 3D-days' notice of the month-to-month tenancy's termination. The entry is: Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED for summary judgment against Plaintiff is GRA l~-./),-i'-endant' s request 4

11/03/2009 MAINE JUDICIAL INFORMATION SYSTEM gmerritt CUMBERLAND COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT mjxxi013 PAGE A - ATTORNEY BY CASE VIEW SOLEY WHARF LLC VS HARBORVIEW INVESTMENTS LLC UTN:AOCSsr -2009-0029232 CASE #:PORSC-CV-2009-00156 SEL VD 01 0000001041 ATTORNEY:LOURIE, DAVID ADDR:189 SPURWINK AVENUE CAPE ELIZABETH ME F FOR:HARBORVIEW INVESTMENTS LLC REPRESENTATION TYPE 04107 DEF RTND DATE 03/24/2009 02 0000003871 ATTORNEY:WALSH, NICHOLAS ADDR:111 COMMERCIAL STREET PORTLAND ME F FOR:SOLEY WHARF LLC H 04101-4719 PL RTND 03/18/2009 Enter Option: A=Add, B+Sel=Browse, M=More, R+Sel=RltnEdit: Select the EXIT KEY for page selection line.