44 Ct. St., LLC v Edwin Gould Servs. for Children & Families

44 Ct. St., LLC v Edwin Gould Servs. for Children & Families 2009 NY Slip Op 03835 [62 AD3d 502] May 14, 2009 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, July 1, 2009

44 Court Street, LLC, Appellant,
v
Edwin Gould Services for Children and Families, Respondent.

—[*1] Platte, Klarsfeld, Levine & Lachtman, LLP, New York (Jeffrey H. Klarsfeld of counsel), for appellant.

Shearman & Sterling LLP, New York (Brian P. Scibetta of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered January 4, 2008, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The evidence at trial amply demonstrated that the parties understood the subject lease clause to refer to the level of funding for the foster care program, not to the level of funding for the agency as a whole (see Federal Ins. Co. v Americas Ins. Co., 258 AD2d 39, 44 [1999]). Furthermore, the parties' conduct during the duration of the lease demonstrated their understanding that the payment of rent was governed by the level of funding given to the foster care programs (see id.). The parties had twice before entered into lease modifications following changes to the foster care program.

We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.