JOHNSON v. MELNIKOFF, 2008-08857 [2d Dept 8-4-2009] 2008-08857
Decided on August 4, 2009.
In an action, inter alia, pursuant to RPAPL article 15 to determine title to real property, the defendant Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A., appeals, as limited by its notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Demarest, J.), dated September 11, 2008, as granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment declaring that its mortgage on the subject property is null and void, and denied that branch of its cross motion which was for ...
DECISION & ORDER In December 1998, the plaintiff purchased the subject property. She financed her purchase with a mortgage loan. In April 2004, the plaintiff had certain discussions with representatives of a company allegedly offering services for refinancing mortgage loans. Two months later, the plaintiff, believing that she was signing documents that would effectuate a refinancing of her mortgage loan, unwittingly executed a deed conveying title to the subject property to ...
MAIORINO v. GALINDO, 2008-06047 [2d Dept 8-4-2009] 2008-06047
Decided on August 4, 2009.
In an action, inter alia, to impose a constructive trust on certain real property, the defendants Steve Galindo, Michael Madia, James Napolitano, Demo Works, Inc., Kitchen Designs by Dependable, Inc., and "ABC Corp.," as successor in interest to Kitchen Designs by Dependable, Inc., appeal, as limited by their notice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), dated May 22, 2008, as denied those branches of the defendants' motion which were to ...
DECISION & ORDER The plaintiff, Edward Maiorino, who was a 50% shareholder in the defendant Demo Works, Inc. (hereinafter Demo), alleged, inter alia, that the defendant Steve Galindo, who was also a 50% shareholder in Demo, improperly diverted assets of Demo to improve real property in Bethpage (hereinafter the Bethpage property). The defendant Michael Madia had purchased the Bethpage property in his own name and financed the purchase by obtaining mortgages for the full purchase ...
BYRON v. HAAS, 2008-01977 [2d Dept 7-28-2009] 2008-01977
Decided on July 28, 2009.
In an action to recover damages for fraud and breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an undated order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), as granted that branch of the cross motion of the defendant John Spanakos pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) which was to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him and, in effect, upon searching the record, dismissed the complaint in its entirety insofar as asserted against the defendants Michelle Haas, ...
The plaintiff commenced the instant action to recover her commission asserting fraud and breach of contract theories of liability, and the defendant John Spanakos counterclaimed against her to recover damages for libel per se and malicious prosecution. The plaintiff moved, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) and CPLR 3016(a), to dismiss the counterclaims, and Spanakos cross-moved, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against him. The Supreme Court ...
LEIST v. TUGENDHAFT, 2009-03562 [2d Dept 7-21-2009] 2009-03562
Decided on July 21, 2009.
DECISION & ORDER The plaintiff commenced this action, inter alia, for specific performance of a purported contract for the sale of real property and filed a notice of pendency against the defendants' beachfront property located in Westhampton, New York. The purported contract consisted of a "Memo of Sale," subscribed by no one, sent as an attachment to an e-mail from the defendants'"listing agent" to the plaintiff's attorney. The plaintiff wrote on the memo of sale that he unconditionally accepted ... General Obligations Law ' 5-703(2) states that a contract for the sale of real property "is void unless the contract or some note or memorandum thereof, expressing the consideration, is in writing, subscribed by the party to be charged, or by his lawful agent thereunto authorized by writing." Assuming, arguendo, that an e-mail is sufficient to comply with the statute of frauds with respect to contracts for the conveyance of real property (see General Obligations Law ' 5-703[ 2]; ...
Comments