Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta A. Tarricone, Inc. v. 980 Washington Street Corp. 169 Misc. 2d 1072

← Cases

A. Tarricone, Inc. v. 980 Washington Street Corp.

169 Misc. 2d 1072 Court Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department, Decision date 1996-09-26 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1072
[653 NYS2d 800]
A. Tarricone, Inc., Respondent, v 980 Washington Street Corp., Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
September 26, 1996
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Peter Brasidas Nickles, Peekskill, for appellant. DelBello, Donnellan & Weingarten, L. L. P, White Plains (Christine Moccia of counsel), for respondent.
p. 1073
OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Final judgment unanimously reversed without costs and petition dismissed.

While consignees may not be protected under the Federal Petroleum Marketing Practices Act ( 15 USC § 2801 et seq.), which defines a protected retailer as a person "who purchases motor fuel for sale to the general public” ( 15 USC § 2801 [7] [emphasis added]; see, Miller v W.H. Bristow, Inc., 739 F Supp 1044 ), such consignees are protected under New York’s motor fuel franchises law (General Business Law § 199-a) where they are franchisees and not mere employees of the distributor (see, Johnson v Mobil Oil Corp., 553 F Supp 195 ). Inasmuch as tenant is such a franchisee, it was entitled to the 10-day notice to cure provided for in General Business Law § 199-c (3) and landlord’s failure to afford tenant this notice is fatal to the maintenance of this proceeding.

DiPaola, P. J., Ingrassia and Floyd, JJ., concur.

Statutes and regulations cited