Castiglia v. Franchise Realty Interstate Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Castiglia v. Franchise Realty Interstate Corp.

107 A.D.2d 1025, 486 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42836

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 107 A.D.2d 1025 (Castiglia v. Franchise Realty Interstate 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

Castiglia v. Franchise Realty Interstate Corp., 107 A.D.2d 1025, 486 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent Castiglia. Memorandum: Special Term properly denied the motion by defendant (third-party plaintiff) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it. We reject defendant’s argument that its contract with third-party defendant, to which plaintiff was not a party, operated to alter its obligations to plaintiff under a separate contract. Defendant cannot avoid its obligations to plaintiff by assigning them to third-party defendant (see Cowper Co. v CDC-Troy, Inc., 50 AD2d 1076; 6 NY Jur 2d, Assignments, § 63); nor can third-party defendant’s agreement to indemnify defendant for liability arising from the contract between plaintiff and defendant change defendant’s relationship with plaintiff from that of principal to that of surety (see, generally, 57 NY Jur, Suretyship and Guaranty, §§ 2, 4). There is no merit to the other arguments raised on appeal. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Cass, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and O’Donnell, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondent Castiglia. Memorandum: Special Term properly denied the motion by defendant (third-party plaintiff) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against it. We reject defendant’s argument that its contract with third-party defendant, to which plaintiff was not a party, operated to alter its obligations to plaintiff under a separate contract. Defendant cannot avoid its obligations to plaintiff by assigning them to third-party defendant (see Cowper Co. v CDC-Troy, Inc., 50 AD2d 1076; 6 NY Jur 2d, Assignments, § 63); nor can third-party defendant’s agreement to indemnify defendant for liability arising from the contract between plaintiff and defendant change defendant’s relationship with plaintiff from that of principal to that of surety (see, generally, 57 NY Jur, Suretyship and Guaranty, §§ 2, 4). There is no merit to the other arguments raised on appeal. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Chautauqua County, Cass, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and O’Donnell, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 A.D.2d 1025, 486 N.Y.S.2d 519, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 42836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castiglia-v-franchise-realty-interstate-corp-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack