432 Broome St., L. L. C. v. Bullen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

432 Broome St., L. L. C. v. Bullen

270 A.D.2d 130, 704 N.Y.S.2d 256, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3011

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

DecidedMarch 21, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 270 A.D.2d 130 (432 Broome St., L. L. C. v. Bullen) 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

432 Broome St., L. L. C. v. Bullen, 270 A.D.2d 130, 704 N.Y.S.2d 256, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3011 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered March 12, 1999, which, after a nonjury trial in an action for, inter alia, declaratory relief, adjudged in defendants’ favor that they are entitled to a 77.78% interest in the subject property, and otherwise dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The owners’. 1943 Agreement provided that the proceeds from the sale of the subject real property “at some future date” were to be distributed in proportion to the owners’ respective investments in the property, namely a 77.78% investment by Michael Kelly and a 22.22% investment by John McGuiness. We conclude, as did the trial court, that the Agreement remains in force and is unaffected by the parties’ conduct in having evenly divided the income from the property since its inception. Although plaintiff purchased a purported 50% interest in the property from the estate of John McGuiness’s widow, it made that purchase with actual knowledge of a defect in its title and, accordingly, cannot tenably claim, in defense of its title, to have been a good faith purchaser for value (see, United Matura Realty v Reade Indus., 155 AD2d 660, lv dismissed 75 NY2d 1005, 76 NY2d 889).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered March 12, 1999, which, after a nonjury trial in an action for, inter alia, declaratory relief, adjudged in defendants’ favor that they are entitled to a 77.78% interest in the subject property, and otherwise dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The owners’. 1943 Agreement provided that the proceeds from the sale of the subject real property “at some future date” were to be distributed in proportion to the owners’ respective investments in the property, namely a 77.78% investment by Michael Kelly and a 22.22% investment by John McGuiness. We conclude, as did the trial court, that the Agreement remains in force and is unaffected by the parties’ conduct in having evenly divided the income from the property since its inception. Although plaintiff purchased a purported 50% interest in the property from the estate of John McGuiness’s widow, it made that purchase with actual knowledge of a defect in its title and, accordingly, cannot tenably claim, in defense of its title, to have been a good faith purchaser for value (see, United Matura Realty v Reade Indus., 155 AD2d 660, lv dismissed 75 NY2d 1005, 76 NY2d 889).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 130, 704 N.Y.S.2d 256, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3011, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/432-broome-st-l-l-c-v-bullen-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack