Downtown Development v. K-Mart Corporation ( 1998 )


Menu:
  • USCA1 Opinion





    [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

    United States Court of Appeals
    For the First Circuit
    ____________________

    No. 97-2316

    DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT, CORP.,

    Plaintiff - Appellant,

    v.

    K-MART CORPORATION,

    Defendant - Appellee.

    ____________________

    APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

    FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

    [Hon. Carmen Consuelo Cerezo, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

    ____________________

    Before

    Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________

    Selya and Stahl, Circuit Judges. ______________

    _____________________

    Johanna Emmanuelli Huertas, with whom Pedro E. Ortiz Alvarez __________________________ ______________________
    and The Law Offices of Pedro E. Ortiz Alvarez were on brief for __________________________________________
    appellant.
    Jon R. Steiger, with whom Patrick M. McCarthy, Howard & _______________ ____________________ _________
    Howard, Steven C. Lausell, James W. McCartney and Jim nez, ______ __________________ ____________________ ________
    Graffam & Lausell were on brief for appellee. _________________



    ____________________

    February 26, 1998
    ____________________




















    Per Curiam. On March 27, 1996, Downtown Development Per Curiam. ___________

    Corporation ("Downtown") filed this action to recover damages

    arising from K-Mart Corporation's ("K-Mart's") alleged illegal

    occupancy of Downtown's property in Ponce, Puerto Rico. Downtown

    appeals the district court's decision to grant summary judgment

    in favor of K-Mart Corporation ("K-Mart").

    We affirm on the grounds stated in the district court's

    opinion and order. See Downtown Dev. Corp. v. K-Mart Corp., Civ. ___ ___________________ ____________

    96-1497CCC (D.P.R. September 25, 1997). We find clause 27 of the

    lease at issue dispositive. As the district court noted, that

    provision grants K-Mart the option to remain as a month-to-month

    tenant after the expiration of the lease until it is forced out

    by the courts. In the instant case, K-Mart simply exercised this

    option.

    Costs to be assessed against appellant.

    Affirmed. Affirmed ________






















    -2-






Document Info

Docket Number: 97-2316

Filed Date: 3/2/1998

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 9/21/2015