Board of Managers of 200 West 79th Street Condominium v. 200 West 79th Street Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Board of Managers of 200 West 79th Street Condominium v. 200 West 79th Street Realty Corp.

201 A.D.2d 277, 607 N.Y.S.2d 285, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 847

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

DecidedFebruary 3, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 201 A.D.2d 277 (Board of Managers of 200 West 79th Street Condominium v. 200 West 79th Street Realty 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

Board of Managers of 200 West 79th Street Condominium v. 200 West 79th Street Realty Corp., 201 A.D.2d 277, 607 N.Y.S.2d 285, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 847 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Peter Tom, J.), entered August 19, 1992, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend its reply to defendant’s counterclaims and for summary judgment on the complaint and dismissal of defendant’s counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that defendant failed to adduce any evidence raising a triable issue of fact with respect to plaintiff’s ownership of the space in question, and that defendant’s affirmative defenses and counterclaims, alleging an oral agreement permitting plaintiff’s use of the space for garbage storage and its breach thereof, are without merit in view of the conclusive proof of ownership in plaintiff. Nor was it error to decide plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment simultaneously with plaintiff’s motion to amend its verified reply so as to allege such ownership interest, defendant having had an adequate opportunity to address the evidence underlying both the motion to amend and the motion for summary judgment (see, Igbara Realty Corp. v New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 104 AD2d 258). We have considered [278]*278defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Peter Tom, J.), entered August 19, 1992, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend its reply to defendant’s counterclaims and for summary judgment on the complaint and dismissal of defendant’s counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that defendant failed to adduce any evidence raising a triable issue of fact with respect to plaintiff’s ownership of the space in question, and that defendant’s affirmative defenses and counterclaims, alleging an oral agreement permitting plaintiff’s use of the space for garbage storage and its breach thereof, are without merit in view of the conclusive proof of ownership in plaintiff. Nor was it error to decide plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment simultaneously with plaintiff’s motion to amend its verified reply so as to allege such ownership interest, defendant having had an adequate opportunity to address the evidence underlying both the motion to amend and the motion for summary judgment (see, Igbara Realty Corp. v New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 104 AD2d 258). We have considered [278]*278defendant’s remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 A.D.2d 277, 607 N.Y.S.2d 285, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-managers-of-200-west-79th-street-condominium-v-200-west-79th-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack