1319 Third Avenue Realty Corp. v. Chateaubriant Restaurant Development Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

1319 Third Avenue Realty Corp. v. Chateaubriant Restaurant Development Co.

19 A.D.3d 221, 797 N.Y.S.2d 62, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6725

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 16, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 19 A.D.3d 221 (1319 Third Avenue Realty Corp. v. Chateaubriant Restaurant Development Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

1319 Third Avenue Realty Corp. v. Chateaubriant Restaurant Development Co., 19 A.D.3d 221, 797 N.Y.S.2d 62, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6725 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

[222]*222Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about October 6, 2004, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for specific performance of its option to purchase the subject real property to the extent of directing the parties to enter into a contract of sale for the property so that defendant will have the opportunity to obtain financing for its purchase, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as the record demonstrates that defendant properly advised plaintiff of its intention to exercise its option to purchase the subject real property, the relief ordered by the motion court was appropriate. While defendant, to prevail fully upon its specific performance claim, will have to show, inter alia, that it is financially able to close the transaction, such a showing was not necessary to the limited relief afforded by the motion court, and indeed could not have fairly been required while plaintiff refused even to enter into a contract of sale.

We have reviewed plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Marlow, J.P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

[222]*222Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about October 6, 2004, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for specific performance of its option to purchase the subject real property to the extent of directing the parties to enter into a contract of sale for the property so that defendant will have the opportunity to obtain financing for its purchase, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Inasmuch as the record demonstrates that defendant properly advised plaintiff of its intention to exercise its option to purchase the subject real property, the relief ordered by the motion court was appropriate. While defendant, to prevail fully upon its specific performance claim, will have to show, inter alia, that it is financially able to close the transaction, such a showing was not necessary to the limited relief afforded by the motion court, and indeed could not have fairly been required while plaintiff refused even to enter into a contract of sale.

We have reviewed plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Marlow, J.P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 A.D.3d 221, 797 N.Y.S.2d 62, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/1319-third-avenue-realty-corp-v-chateaubriant-restaurant-development-co-nyappdiv-2005.