In Smith v. James , Robert Smith was Shari James's landlord when the two agreed James would prematurely vacate the unit, new tenants would be accepted in her place, and, James would pay the rent differential for the balance of the lease term.
When James supposedly failed to honor the agreement and a lawsuit was filed, James countersued asking for a return of her rent payments -- which were allegedly associated with services Smith never provided -- together with the monies she paid pursuant to the surrender agreement.
After the City Court of Yonkers dismissed her counterclaim, James appealed to the Appellate Term, Second Department.
The AT2 found the parties had a "valid and enforceable surrender agreement." Since she never complained about the alleged lack of services, nor gave Smith and opportunity to provide same, James wasn't permitted to recoup the monies she had remitted.
Should James have given up?
To download a copy of the Appellate Term's decision, please use this link: Smith v. James