Opinion ID: 504431
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Percentage Rent under the Lease

Text: 26 In its cross-appeal, Woolworth argues that the district court's holding that the percentage rent provision of Joseph Brothers' lease was still in effect and that Woolworth was obligated to Joseph Brothers for rental payments under the terms of the lease based on SCOA's sales on the demised premises is erroneous as a matter of law. The disputed provision of the lease provides: 27 Art. 5A. On [February 1st, annually], the Tenant agrees to mail or deliver to the Landlord a statement sworn to by one of its accountants, showing the sales (computed as hereinafter provided) made by F.W. Woolworth Co. and its licensees in its store in the demised premises during the preceding calendar year. Should the sum of 28 (a) 2% of the first $10,000,000, and 29 (b) 1% of the remainder of the sales (i.e. over $10,000,000) exceed the annual minimum rent payable for the same period covered by such statement, Tenant agrees that it will forthwith pay to the Landlord, as percentage rent due hereunder, a sum equivalent to such excess. 30 In computing such sales for the purpose of this article, the Tenant shall take the total amount of sales of merchandise and services made in the demised premises, whether for cash or credit, [with certain exclusions and deductions]. 31