Brennan Restaurant Builders Supply Corp. v. Jimbold Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brennan Restaurant Builders Supply Corp. v. Jimbold Corp.

75 A.D.2d 609, 426 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11064

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

DecidedApril 21, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 75 A.D.2d 609 (Brennan Restaurant Builders Supply Corp. v. Jimbold 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

Brennan Restaurant Builders Supply Corp. v. Jimbold Corp., 75 A.D.2d 609, 426 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11064 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, [610]*610Westchester County, entered July 18, 1979, which denied its motion for summary judgment and granted the cross motion of defendant Jimbold Corporation for summary judgment. Order modified, on the law, by deleting thereform the provision granting defendant Jimbold’s cross motion and substituting therefor a provision denying said cross motion. As so modified, order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements payable to plaintiff. The record indicates that there are triable issues of fact regarding the existence of an implied consent and whether the work performed by plaintiff constituted improvements inuring to the benefit of the owner as required by section 3 of the Lien Law. Thus, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied and defendant Jimbold’s cross motion for the same relief should have been denied. Rabin, J. P., Gulotta, Cohalan and Margett, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, [610]*610Westchester County, entered July 18, 1979, which denied its motion for summary judgment and granted the cross motion of defendant Jimbold Corporation for summary judgment. Order modified, on the law, by deleting thereform the provision granting defendant Jimbold’s cross motion and substituting therefor a provision denying said cross motion. As so modified, order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements payable to plaintiff. The record indicates that there are triable issues of fact regarding the existence of an implied consent and whether the work performed by plaintiff constituted improvements inuring to the benefit of the owner as required by section 3 of the Lien Law. Thus, plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied and defendant Jimbold’s cross motion for the same relief should have been denied. Rabin, J. P., Gulotta, Cohalan and Margett, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 A.D.2d 609, 426 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11064, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brennan-restaurant-builders-supply-corp-v-jimbold-corp-nyappdiv-1980.