Avaho Industries, Inc. v. Le Sannom Building Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Avaho Industries, Inc. v. Le Sannom Building Corp.

172 A.D.2d 468

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

DecidedApril 30, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 172 A.D.2d 468 (Avaho Industries, Inc. v. Le Sannom Building Corp.) 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

Avaho Industries, Inc. v. Le Sannom Building Corp., 172 A.D.2d 468 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered November 1, 1990, which, inter alia, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, a subcontractor, brings this action to foreclose its mechanic’s lien for material and services. Defendant-appellant, the owner of the premises, moved for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212, dismissing the complaint as against it, on the ground that plaintiff failed to meet a condition precedent to recovery on the underlying construction contract, since plaintiff had not installed the exhaust fans specified in [469]*469the contract. The motion was denied. We agree that issues of fact exist, inter alia, as to whether the parties treated plaintiffs performance of the contract as complete. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered November 1, 1990, which, inter alia, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff, a subcontractor, brings this action to foreclose its mechanic’s lien for material and services. Defendant-appellant, the owner of the premises, moved for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212, dismissing the complaint as against it, on the ground that plaintiff failed to meet a condition precedent to recovery on the underlying construction contract, since plaintiff had not installed the exhaust fans specified in [469]*469the contract. The motion was denied. We agree that issues of fact exist, inter alia, as to whether the parties treated plaintiffs performance of the contract as complete. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Ross and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avaho-industries-inc-v-le-sannom-building-corp-nyappdiv-1991.