STOCK TITAN

Ark Restaurants (ARKR) faces mixed Bryant Park ruling and ongoing lease uncertainty

Filing Impact
(Moderate)
Filing Sentiment
(Neutral)
Form Type
8-K

Rhea-AI Filing Summary

Ark Restaurants Corp. reports a key court ruling in its long-running dispute over its Bryant Park restaurant locations in New York City. A New York State court granted summary judgment in favor of the company on its claim that the landlord breached the Bryant Park Grill lease and related right of first lease for the Bryant Park Café, entitling Ark to money damages to be decided at a future trial.

The court also granted the landlord summary judgment on its claims for ejectment, use and occupancy, and breach of contract relating to the Bryant Park Café and The Porch at Bryant Park, while dismissing the remainder of Ark’s claims. Ark plans to file a Notice of Appeal on the adverse portions of the decision, which would stay eviction during the appeal. The company states that the uncertainty around this dispute has had, and is expected to continue to have, a material adverse impact on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

Positive

  • None.

Negative

  • Material adverse impact from Bryant Park dispute: The company states the lease and litigation uncertainty has had, and is expected to continue to have, a material adverse impact on its business, financial condition, and results of operations while the dispute is litigated and if it cannot extend or renew the leases on favorable terms.

Insights

Partial win on contract claim but ongoing ejectment risk creates material uncertainty.

The court’s decision gives Ark Restaurants a meaningful legal victory on breach of contract for the Bryant Park Grill and related right of first lease, with money damages to be determined later. However, it did not secure continued tenancy rights through specific performance.

The landlord obtained summary judgment on ejectment, use and occupancy, and breach of contract for the Bryant Park Café and The Porch, and may seek damages at a future trial. Ark will appeal adverse portions, which should stay eviction during the appeal process, but continued court-ordered payments and legal exposure remain.

Because management explicitly states this dispute has had and is expected to continue to have a material adverse impact on business, financial condition, and results of operations, the case represents a significant operational and financial risk until the appeal and damages issues are resolved.

Item 8.01 Other Events Other
Voluntary disclosure of events the company deems important to shareholders but not covered by other items.
Bryant Park Grill/Café lease expiry April 30, 2025 Expiration date for Bryant Park Grill and Café agreements
The Porch lease expiry March 31, 2025 Expiration date for The Porch at Bryant Park agreement
Summary judgment decision date June 18, 2026 Date court issued mixed summary judgment ruling
Use and occupancy payments order August 13, 2025 Date court required ongoing use and occupancy payments
Complaint filing date March 28, 2025 Date Ark filed initial New York State Supreme Court action
summary judgment legal
"By decision dated June 18, 2026, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Company..."
Summary judgment is a court decision made without a full trial when a judge concludes there is no real dispute about the important facts and one side wins as a matter of law. For investors it matters because such a ruling can quickly end litigation that might otherwise drag on, reducing uncertainty about potential liabilities, legal costs and impacts on a company’s stock price — like a referee stopping a game when the outcome is clear.
right of first lease legal
"Management has been working ... to enforce the Company's right of first lease under the Company's lease agreements..."
use and occupancy payments legal
"the Landlord filed a motion to require the Company to make monthly use and occupancy payments..."
material adverse impact financial
"The uncertainty related to this dispute has had, and is expected to continue to have, a material adverse impact on our business..."
forward-looking statements regulatory
"Certain statements ... may be considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A..."
Forward-looking statements are predictions or plans that companies share about what they expect to happen in the future, like estimating sales or profits. They matter because they help investors understand a company's outlook, but since they are based on guesses and assumptions, they can sometimes be wrong.
See more from StockTitan in Google Search and AI answers. Adds StockTitan as a preferred source · opens Google
Add on Google
Learn about SEC filing dates
FALSE000077954400007795442026-06-262026-06-26

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
______________________
 
FORM 8-K 
 
CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): June 26, 2026
 
ARK RESTAURANTS CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter) 
New York1-0945313-3156768  
(State or other jurisdiction
of incorporation)
(Commission
File Number)
(IRS Employer
Identification No.)
 
85 Fifth Avenue
New York, New York 10003
(Address of principal executive offices, with zip code)
 
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (212) 206-8800
 
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:

[   ]  Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) 
[   ]  Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) 
[   ]  Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) 
[   ]  Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e -4(c)) 

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each classTrading Symbol(s)Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $.01 per shareARKR The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§240.12b of this chapter).
 
       Emerging growth company o
 
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. o




Item 8.01 Other Events.
As previously disclosed, Ark Restaurants Corp.’s (the “Company”, “we” or “us”) agreements with the Bryant Park Corporation (the “Landlord”) (a private non-profit corporation that operates and maintains Bryant Park under agreements with the City of New York Department of Parks & Recreation), for the Bryant Park Grill and the Bryant Park Café expired on April 30, 2025 and for The Porch at Bryant Park expired on March 31, 2025. In July of 2023 (for the Bryant Park Grill and the Bryant Park Café) and September of 2023 (for The Porch at Bryant Park), the Company received requests for proposals (the "RFPs") from the Landlord to which we responded on October 26, 2023. The agreements offered under the RFPs for both locations were for new 10-year agreements, with one five-year renewal option. In the second quarter of 2025, the Landlord stated publicly that it had selected a new operator for the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café and The Porch at Bryant Park. However, to the best of our knowledge, no agreements between the Landlord and the selected operator have received the approvals of either the City of New York Department of Parks & Recreation or the New York Public Library, of which both approvals are required before any new lease can become effective.
Management has been working with outside advisors to assist the Company's efforts to ensure that the RFP awards process was both fair and transparent and to enforce the Company's right of first lease under the Company's lease agreements in connection with the Bryant Park Café. On March 28, 2025, the Company filed a complaint in New York State Supreme Court (the "New York Action"), alleging among other things, that the bid process conducted by the Landlord was defective, failed to comply with the provisions of the agreements underlying the Landlord’s right to operate Bryant Park and violated applicable law; that a lease was being awarded to a lower bidder with a limited, unsuccessful track record in the hospitality business; and that the award of the lease for the Café violated the Company's right of first lease. As part of the relief sought in the New York Action, the Company requested that the court declare that, under the circumstances presented, the Landlord was required to accept—and should have accepted — its submitted bids. In addition, on March 28, 2025, the Company also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in court to enjoin the Landlord from commencing legal proceedings to evict the Company from the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café and The Porch at Bryant Park premises. On April 24, 2025, the Court denied the motion. The Company filed a notice of appeal of the ruling. The Company has received from the Landlord a “notice to quit” the premises and for the Company to terminate its tenancy. On June 16, 2025, the Company filed an amended complaint in the New York Action, adding a cause of action for age discrimination by the Landlord in its selection of a new operator for the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café and The Porch at Bryant Park. On June 26, 2025, the Landlord filed counterclaims against the Company in the New York Action seeking, among other things, to eject the Company from the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café and The Porch at Bryant Park. On July 16, 2025, the Company moved to dismiss eight of the fourteen counterclaims filed by the Landlord. On July 29, 2025, the Landlord filed a motion to require the Company to make monthly use and occupancy payments in connection with the Bryant Park Grill, the Bryant Park Café and The Porch at Bryant Park during the pendency of the case. On August 13, 2025, the Court issued a decision requiring the Company to make the use and occupancy payments demanded by the Landlord during the pendency of the case. Given that the Company had made and will continue to make all payments pursuant to the relevant leases while it continues to operate the restaurants, it did not substantively oppose the Landlord’s motion or appeal the Court's decision. On December 8, 2025, the Court dismissed the Landlord’s claims for declaratory judgment, unjust enrichment, and tortious interference.
On January 9, 2026, the Landlord moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the Company’s claim and judgment in its favor on its counterclaims, for ejectment, breach of contract, and use and occupancy. The Company cross-moved for summary judgment, seeking judgment in its favor on its causes of action for enforcement of its right of first lease and its cause of action for age discrimination.



By decision dated June 18, 2026, the Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Company with respect to its claim for the Landlord’s breach of contract of the lease for the Bryant Park Grill and the related right of first lease for the Bryant Park Café. The Court ruled that the Company is entitled to money damages to be determined in a future trial. The Court did not grant the Company specific performance nor did it preclude the Landlord’s claim for ejectment. The Court granted the Landlord’s motion for summary judgment with respect to its claims for ejectment, use and occupancy, and breach of contract concerning the lease for the Bryant Park Café and the license for The Porch at Bryant Park, ruling that the Landlord may seek damages for use and occupancy in a future trial. The Court dismissed the remainder of the Company’s claims.
The Company intends to file a Notice of Appeal related to the portions of the above decision which are adverse to the Company. The filing of the Notice of Appeal will result in an automatic stay of eviction pending determination of the appeal. The Company will be required to file an undertaking for the period of time the appeal is likely to take to be determined. The amount of the undertaking will be determined by the Court.
The Company is unable to predict the outcome of this matter at this time. The uncertainty related to this dispute has had, and is expected to continue to have, a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations while the dispute is litigated and if we are unable to prevail in the above actions and/or are unable to extend or renew these leases on favorable terms, if at all.
Certain statements in this this Current Report on Form 8-K may be considered “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements generally relate to future events or the Company’s future financial or operating performance and may be identified by words such as “may,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “will,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “predict,” or similar words. Such statements include, but are not limited to, the Company’s intention to file a Notice of Appeal, the expected effect of such filing, including an anticipated stay of eviction pending appeal, the Company’s expected obligation to file an undertaking and the amount and duration thereof, and the expected continued impact of the dispute on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. Such forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions made by the Company as of the date hereof and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, but are not limited to: (i) risks relating to the timing and outcome of the appeal, (ii) whether any stay of eviction will be available or remain in effect, (iii) the amount and terms of any undertaking or other court-ordered payments, (iv) the possibility of additional adverse rulings, (v) the Company’s ability to remain in possession of and continue operating the premises, (vi) the Company’s ability to extend or renew the relevant leases on favorable terms, if at all, and (vii) the risk that the dispute may continue to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.









SIGNATURES
 
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
 
 ARK RESTAURANTS CORP.
   
 By:/s/ Michael Weinstein
  Name: Michael Weinstein
  Title: Chief Executive Officer
   
Date: June 26, 2026


FAQ

What did the June 18, 2026 court decision mean for ARKR’s Bryant Park locations?

The court granted Ark Restaurants summary judgment on a breach of contract claim for the Bryant Park Grill lease and related right of first lease, entitling it to money damages. However, it also granted the landlord summary judgment on ejectment and other claims for the Café and The Porch.

How does the Bryant Park lease dispute affect Ark Restaurants (ARKR) financially?

Ark Restaurants states the dispute has had, and is expected to continue to have, a material adverse impact on its business, financial condition, and results of operations. The uncertainty around continued operations and potential damages adds meaningful financial and operational risk for the company.

Is Ark Restaurants (ARKR) being evicted from the Bryant Park Grill, Café, and The Porch?

The court granted the landlord summary judgment on ejectment claims, but Ark plans to file a Notice of Appeal. Filing the appeal will automatically stay eviction during the appeal, subject to Ark providing an undertaking in an amount to be set by the court.

What ongoing obligations does Ark Restaurants (ARKR) have during the Bryant Park dispute?

A prior court decision requires Ark to make use and occupancy payments during the case, which it has been doing while operating the restaurants. An appeal-related undertaking will also be required for the stay of eviction, with the amount to be determined by the court.

Filing Exhibits & Attachments

3 documents