A legal dispute has arisen between McDonald's and the co-founder and former CEO of StreetEasy over the ownership of the rooftop space where Smith's lavish penthouse is located. McDonald's asserts its ownership of the rooftop space utilized for the penthouse, according to the New York Post.
The former StreetEasy CEO, Michael A. Smith, who generated $50 million from the 2013 sale of the company to Zillow, owns the high-end penthouse at 147 Reade Street. McDonald's lawsuit, filed recently, outlines the features of Smith's penthouse, which boasts four outdoor decks and a private swimming pool.
The rooftop area underwent significant expansion in 2007, yielding approximately 3,700 square feet of space atop Tribeca, a five-story condominium complex built-in 1987. The complex includes properties located at 149 Reade Street, 165 Chambers Street, and 303-307 Greenwich Street.
McDonald's claims it purchased four commercial units back in 1990 and negotiated several easements, one of which allowed the installation of cooling towers on the roofs of 147 and 149 Reade. Documents submitted to the court, first reported by Bloomberg News, indicate the space was utilized by McDonald's until 2006, when it replaced its cooling tower with a new system no longer requiring rooftop access.
After this, Smith reportedly received approval from the condominium board to expand the penthouse, which involved demolishing part of the easement McDonald’s claims to own. Emily Reisbaum, Smith’s attorney, directed Bloomberg to a motion from 2021 where Smith contestably argued the statute of limitations had expired.
Interestingly, Smith isn’t new to disputes over his penthouse. Bloomberg News highlighted earlier accusations from the condo board claiming he had misused his position as president to deceive other owners about the extent of the penthouse expansion. The board is now seeking at least $5 million in damages related to those earlier claims.
This lawsuit not only pits McDonald's—a globally recognized fast-food chain—against Smith, but it also brings to light larger issues surrounding property rights, condominium governance, and historical easement agreements. The outcome could influence future property disputes, especially about the rights of commercial entities against individual owners.
Legal analysts are keeping close tabs on this case. While it may seem like just another corporate dispute, the precedent it sets over rooftop rights and easements holds potential ramifications not just for the involved parties but for similar cases across New York City and beyond.
Given the high stakes involved, Smith's and McDonald's legal teams are likely bracing themselves for what could be drawn-out litigation. The outcome remains unclear, but the public and media interest continues to grow as the situation progresses through the courts.
