Epstein Secrets

governs in landlord-tenant disputes involving the Government, it nevertheless relied on state law cases in interpreting the particular provision of the Postal Service lease at issue. See 767 F.2d at 880-81. FN6. Other courts, too, have applied state substantive law as the rule of decision in landlord-tenant disp

d OFM by letter that he intended to exercise his right of first refusal and renew the lease. Epstein contends that in a telephone conference between Richard Massey of OFM and Jeffrey Schantz, Epstein's transaction counsel, on April 19, 1996, OFM orally consented to Epstein's request to sublet the Premises to F

governs in landlord-tenant disputes involving the Government, it nevertheless relied on state law cases in interpreting the particular provision of the Postal Service lease at issue. See 767 F.2d at 880-81. FN6. Other courts, too, have applied state substantive law as the rule of decision in landlord-tenant disp

d OFM by letter that he intended to exercise his right of first refusal and renew the lease. Epstein contends that in a telephone conference between Richard Massey of OFM and Jeffrey Schantz, Epstein's transaction counsel, on April 19, 1996, OFM orally consented to Epstein's request to sublet the Premises to F

overns in landlord-tenant disputes involving the Government, it nevertheless relied on state law cases in interpreting the particular provision of the Postal Service lease at issue. See 767 P.M at 88041. 6. Other courts, too, have applied state substan- tive law as the rule of decision In landlord-tenant disput

M by letter that he intended to exercise his right of first refusal and renew the lease. Epstein contends that in a telephone confer- ence between Richard Massey of OFM and EFTA00187393 Jeffrey Schantz, Epstein's transaction coun- sel, on April 19, 1996, OFM orally consented to Epstein's request to sublet