Confirm favorite deletion?
Property Keyed to Merrill
Symphony Space, Inc. v. Pergola Properties, Inc.
Citation:669 N.E.2d 799
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
- Topic: Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.
- Parties: Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.
- Procedural Posture & History: Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.
- Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.: A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.
- Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises: Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
- Brief Facts: A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.
- Rule of Law: Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.
- Facts: What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case. Review the Facts of this case here:
The defendant’s, Pergola, predecessor owned a two-story building on the Broadway block between 94th and 95th street, as well as two other adjacent properties. The plaintiff, Symphony, was a not-for-profit entity devoted to the arts that had previously rented the theater space in the two-story building. Pergola’s predecessor desired to obtain a tax exemption, and so it sold Symphony the profit for a below-market price and had Symphony lease back all space inside the building besides the theater for a dollar per year. In exchange for consideration of ten dollars, Symphony also granted Pergola’s predecessor the right to repurchase the entire building. Pergola’s predecessor maintained liability for the mortgage on the two-story building and for certain maintenance obligations. The option agreement provided that Pergola’s predecessor might repurchase the property during any of the following “Exercise Periods”: (1) at any time after July 1, 1979 so long as the Notice of Election specifies that the Closing is to occur during any of the calendar years 1987, 1993, 1998, and 2003; (2) at any time following the maturity of indebtedness evidenced by the Note and secured by the Mortgage, whether by acceleration or otherwise; (3) during the ninety days immediately following any termination of the Lease by the lessor thereof other than for nonpayment of rent or any termination of the Lease by the lessee thereof; and (4) during the ninety days immediately following the thirtieth day after Pergola’s predecessor shall have sent Symphony a notice specifying a default by Symphony of the Lease by the lessee thereof. The option provided a number of purchase prices dependent on the year it was exercised, and indicated the option granted is unconditional. Finally, the option was described as a covenant running with the land, inuring to the benefit of heirs, successors, and assigns of Broadwest. Pergola purchased its predecessor’s two adjacent properties and the option to purchase Symphony’s building in 1982. In 1985, Pergola sent notice that Symphony was in default and that it would be exercising the option to purchase.
- Issue(s): Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.
- Holding: Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.
- Concurring / Dissenting Opinions: Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.
- Reasoning and Analysis: Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.