Real Estate Attorney in Manhattan Building Possession Order

The client owned a commercial building leased for a specific retail purpose under a written lease agreement that expressly prohibited assignment or subletting without prior written consent.

After learning that the original tenant had transferred occupancy to another operator, the owner attempted informal resolution but was met with refusal to vacate.

With negotiations unsuccessful and continued unauthorized use of the premises, the client sought legal intervention to protect ownership and possession rights under New York law.

The client owned a commercial building leased for a specific retail purpose under a written lease agreement that expressly prohibited assignment or subletting without prior written consent.

After learning that the original tenant had transferred occupancy to another operator, the owner attempted informal resolution but was met with refusal to vacate.

With negotiations unsuccessful and continued unauthorized use of the premises, the client sought legal intervention to protect ownership and possession rights under New York law.

The tenant originally entered into the lease to operate a grocery style retail business but later transferred possession to a third party without notice or approval.

This transfer constituted a clear violation of the lease terms and resulted in occupancy by an entity with no contractual relationship with the owner.

The continued presence of the occupant created operational disruption and exposed the owner to potential legal and financial risk, making prompt action essential.

The primary legal issues included unlawful possession without legal title or contractual authority and breach of lease through unauthorized assignment or subletting.

Under New York property principles, a landlord may seek possession when an occupant lacks lawful rights to remain.

The case required clear proof that the original lease prohibited transfer and that no consent had been given by the owner.

Rather than seeking unjust enrichment or rent equivalent damages, the attorney advised filing an action for turnover of the building.

In New York practice, courts prioritize restoring possession to the rightful owner where occupancy is unsupported by legal authority.

This strategy minimized procedural delays and avoided disputes over valuation or interim use.

The attorney submitted the original lease agreement demonstrating explicit prohibitions on assignment and subletting without written consent.

No evidence of consent existed, and the occupant was unable to produce any valid contractual basis for possession.

This established that the occupant was holding the property without lawful authority and was therefore obligated to surrender possession.