Suretyship and Guarantee - Release of Guarantor - Guarantor Obligations Not Discharged in Spite of Modifications to Lease without Guarantor's Consent - Guaranty Provided That Guarantor Remained Bound by Subsequent Modifications

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Suzanne J. Adams, J.), entered on or about January 3, 2025, which granted defendant Chris Adams's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) to dismiss plaintiff's fourth and sixth claims for breach of guaranty and attorneys' fees, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

The motion court should not have dismissed plaintiff's claims under the guaranty based on the three lease modifications to which defendant guarantor did not consent. While it is true that generally, "an obligation may not be altered without the consent of the party who assumed the obligation" (Bier Pension Plan Trust v Estate of Schneierson, 74 NY2d 312, 315 [1989]), where, as here, the guaranty provides that the guarantor remains bound by subsequent modifications to the lease, defendant guarantor is "bound to satisfy the underlying obligations in spite of modifications to those obligations" (American Bank & Trust Co. v Koplik, 87 AD2d 351, 353 [1st Dept 1982]).

As we determined in SpringPrince, LLC v Elie Tahari, Ltd. (173 AD3d 544 [1st Dept 2019]), "[t]he subsequent agreement between the tenant and the landlord reducing the tenant's rent obligations did not discharge defendant's obligations under the guaranty as it merely constituted leniency on the part of the landlord and did not create a new contract between the parties" (id. at 545-546). Concur—Moulton, J.P., Friedman, Scarpulla, O'Neill Levy, Michael, JJ.

Motion for leave to file amicus curiae brief, denied.