34th & 7th Ave., L. L. C. v. 152 W. 34th Street, Inc.
Opinion of the Court
—Order, Supreme
The motion court correctly found that the holder of the right of first refusal had exercised its refusal right in timely manner, and that, although the terms of the sale to such holder were not identical to those contained in the subject contract, specific performance was not warranted where the total substantive value of the holder’s offer was at least equivalent, if not better, than what defendant would have received from plaintiff (cf., Salm v Sammito, 111 AD2d 844, affd 66 NY2d 661). Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Wallach and Lerner, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.