In Kaplan v. Lippman, 75 NY2d 320 [1990] a sublessee of a cooperative apartment sought to exercise an option in the sublease agreement to purchase the sublessor's shares in the cooperative apartment (75 N.Y.2d 323). The sublessor had sought to defeat the sublessee's claim on the grounds that the attorney who signed on behalf of the sublessee did not have authority (id. at 324). The Court held that the option was subject to the Statute of Frauds, and that it had satisfied the statute's requirements. It further noted that "the sublessor's Statute of Frauds argument was doomed from the outset because it demonstrates an essential misunderstanding of the way in which the statute operates. The Statute of Frauds requires that a contract for the sale or long-term lease of property be signed by the party to be charged, i.e., the party against whom enforcement of the contract is sought. The absence of a signature by the party seeking to enforce the agreement is without legal significance." (75 NY2d at 324, footnote 1)