D & M Electrical Contracting, Inc. v. Town of North Castle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

D & M Electrical Contracting, Inc. v. Town of North Castle

303 A.D.2d 707, 756 N.Y.S.2d 863

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 31, 2003·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover the proceeds of a cash bond, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), dated March 5, 2002, as denied its motion for summary judgment, and, in effect, upon searching the record, granted summary judgment to the defendant dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion is granted.

The defendant acknowledges that it is only a stakeholder, and the plaintiff is the only party before this Court with any claim to the bonded funds (see Town Law § 277 [9]). In addition, the plaintiff performed the infrastructure improvements covered by the bond. Thus, the plaintiff should have been awarded summary judgment on its complaint to recover the proceeds of the bond. However, our determination is without prejudice to claims, if any, of the owners of the four other prop[708]*708erties within the subdivision. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover the proceeds of a cash bond, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), dated March 5, 2002, as denied its motion for summary judgment, and, in effect, upon searching the record, granted summary judgment to the defendant dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the motion is granted.

The defendant acknowledges that it is only a stakeholder, and the plaintiff is the only party before this Court with any claim to the bonded funds (see Town Law § 277 [9]). In addition, the plaintiff performed the infrastructure improvements covered by the bond. Thus, the plaintiff should have been awarded summary judgment on its complaint to recover the proceeds of the bond. However, our determination is without prejudice to claims, if any, of the owners of the four other prop[708]*708erties within the subdivision. Ritter, J.P., S. Miller, H. Miller and Cozier, JJ., concur.

D & M Electrical Contracting, Inc. v. Town of North Castle, 303 A.D.2d 707, 756 N.Y.S.2d 863 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

303 A.D.2d 707 (D & M Electrical Contracting, Inc. v. Town of North Castle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related