Flowers v. 73rd Townhouse LLC
This text of 99 A.D.3d 431 (Flowers v. 73rd Townhouse LLC) 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.
Opinion
The documentary evidence submitted on the motion — namely, checks from the Law Offices of Milton S. Rinzler to certain defendants — failed to show conclusively that plaintiff’s claims were time-barred. The affidavits submitted by defendants were not “documentary evidence” within the meaning of CPLR 3211 (a) (1) (see e.g. Granada Condominium III Assn. v Palomino, 78 AD3d 996, 997 [2d Dept 2010]; Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 73 AD3d 78, 85-86 [2d Dept 2010]), and without the affidavits, it cannot be concluded that defendant 73rd Townhouse LLC made distributions that were protected by the statute of limitations in Limited Liability Company Law § 508 (c).
On appeal, defendants argue only the statute of limitations. Accordingly, they have abandoned so much of their motion as was based on CPLR 3211 (a) (7). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Saxe, DeGrasse, Freedman and Román, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
99 A.D.3d 431, 951 N.Y.2d 393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flowers-v-73rd-townhouse-llc-nyappdiv-2012.