Brener & Lewis Management Co. v. Estate of Crespi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brener & Lewis Management Co. v. Estate of Crespi

268 A.D.2d 243, 701 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 67

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 268 A.D.2d 243 (Brener & Lewis Management Co. v. Estate of Crespi) 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

Brener & Lewis Management Co. v. Estate of Crespi, 268 A.D.2d 243, 701 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 67 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered June 19, 1998, which, in an action by a real estate broker against the lessor of premises to recover a commission and against the lessor and lessee for fraud, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and denied plaintiffs cross motion to substitute a corporation as a defendant in place of the individual originally alleged to be the lessor, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly dismissed the action and denied plaintiffs cross motion to substitute the corporate principal in place of the individual originally sought to be held liable. Although the action was brought against the individuals who negotiated the lease, rather than the corporate signatories, plaintiff knew or should have known from the outset that such individuals were acting only in a representative capacity on behalf of their respective corporate principals. It is clear that plaintiffs failure to name the proper corporate parties was no mere pleading mistake, but rather an attempt to secure some “tactical advantage in the litigation” (Buron v Coupal, 87 NY2d 173, 181). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered June 19, 1998, which, in an action by a real estate broker against the lessor of premises to recover a commission and against the lessor and lessee for fraud, granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and denied plaintiffs cross motion to substitute a corporation as a defendant in place of the individual originally alleged to be the lessor, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly dismissed the action and denied plaintiffs cross motion to substitute the corporate principal in place of the individual originally sought to be held liable. Although the action was brought against the individuals who negotiated the lease, rather than the corporate signatories, plaintiff knew or should have known from the outset that such individuals were acting only in a representative capacity on behalf of their respective corporate principals. It is clear that plaintiffs failure to name the proper corporate parties was no mere pleading mistake, but rather an attempt to secure some “tactical advantage in the litigation” (Buron v Coupal, 87 NY2d 173, 181). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 243, 701 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 67, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brener-lewis-management-co-v-estate-of-crespi-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack