A company representing two concessioners at a Pine Street food court now is seeking an injunction that would prevent the commercial property’s owner from leasing additional space there to a third party.
D&M Mirafiore LLC—a company whose principals include the owners of Dante’s Pizza and Miyuki at Pine Street Concessions—already is suing the owner of 75 Pine St. for breach of lease for failing to offer them first right of refusal to use the additional space.
Yet the “[l]andlord continues to refuse to disclose the terms and conditions offered to the third party,” according to a Motion for Injunction filed May 5 in state Superior Court by Westport-based attorney Richard Pate.
“In the absence of an order specifically enjoining the Landlord from leasing the space in Premises to a third party, D&M will not be able to enlarge its business, something it desperately seeks to do, and, in fact, will lose business opportunities which will be diverted to a possible new tenant serving goods similar to those sold by D&M,” the motion said.
The court set a June 7 conference to discuss the injunction.
According to the plaintiff, D&M in January 2016 signed a lease granting them first right of refusal but “recently learned that Landlord has leased space at Premises to a third party without first offering D&M the same terms and conditions offered to the third party.”
As a result, they’ve “suffered monetary damages and will continue to suffer monetary damages,” the motion said.
The lease prohibits the property owner from permitting the use of the premises to non-tenants, yet the landlord “has commenced the construction of patio in exterior common areas of Premises with the express intention of permitting neighboring businesses, which are not tenants of Premises, to use the same,” the motion said.
If the court doesn’t stop the landlord from leasing out the space, D&M likely “will suffer substantial harm” that will “become irreparable once a third party moves int the space or other are permitted to use the exterior common areas because both these events divert customers way from D&M,” the motion said.
“No adequate remedy at law could compensate it for the interference with its business and its relationship with its customers once it starts,” it said.
[Comments are disabled on this article.]