Radioshack Corp. v. Azusa Pacific University CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 2016B262107California2,274 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and landlord Azusa Pacific University appeals the trial court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff and tenant RadioShack, arguing that the court erroneously found Defendant breached its lease agreement with RadioShack. The sole issue on summary judgment was the interpretation of an excessive vacancy provision involving the replacement of a “Major Tenant” (an anchor tenant) with a “Similar Tenant.” The court interpreted the lease agreement to allow RadioShack to pay reduced rent because the Similar Tenant did not sell the same goods as the Major Tenant. We reverse, concluding that RadioShack is not entitled to a reduction in rent. Under the plain language of the lease, a replacement tenant that sells the same quality of goods is a Similar Tenant. We conclude that Defendant did not breach the lease agreement by demanding payment of full rent. We reverse and remand for entry of judgment in Defendant’s favor.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In July 2000, RadioShack entered into a lease with Golden Mountain Investments, Inc. (Defendant’s predecessor) for retail space in an Azusa shopping center containing a Big Lots. Defendant subsequently…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.