Gerald Syndicate, Inc. v. Negev Home Made Foods, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gerald Syndicate, Inc. v. Negev Home Made Foods, Inc.

198 A.D.2d 92, 603 N.Y.S.2d 843

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

DecidedNovember 16, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 198 A.D.2d 92 (Gerald Syndicate, Inc. v. Negev Home Made Foods, Inc.) 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

Gerald Syndicate, Inc. v. Negev Home Made Foods, Inc., 198 A.D.2d 92, 603 N.Y.S.2d 843 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered October 6, 1992, awarding damages in favor of plaintiff and against the corporate defendants ("Negev”), and bringing up for review an order of the same court and Justice, also entered October 6, 1992, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s [93]*93motion for summary judgment to the extent of granting summary judgment as against Negev, and denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the action as against the individual defendant (Gross) for lack of merit and as against Gross and Negev for lack of jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The appeal from the order is unanimously dismissed as subsumed within the appeal from the judgment, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that notwithstanding that Gross signed the lease between plaintiff as landlord and Negev as tenant only in his capacity as Negev’s president, Gross’s initialling of the pages of the typewritten rider, including page 13 containing a clause specifically naming Gross, in boldface letters, as guarantor of Negev’s rent obligations, but with the signature space for the individual guarantee left blank, these conflicting circumstances raises an issue of fact whether the parties intended that Gross should be individually bound by the lease (see, Paribas Props. v Benson, 146 AD2d 522, 525-526, distinguishing Salzman Sign Co. v Beck, 10 NY2d 63, 67). Concerning jurisdiction, the service of the two summonses on Gross was effective to confer jurisdiction on both him and the two Negev defendants (Port Chester Elec. Co. v Ronbed Corp., 28 AD2d 1008). Gross’s assertion that at the time of service he was no longer an officer of Negev is conclusory and insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact in the face of the documentary evidence submitted by plaintiff on the issue. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered October 6, 1992, awarding damages in favor of plaintiff and against the corporate defendants ("Negev”), and bringing up for review an order of the same court and Justice, also entered October 6, 1992, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s [93]*93motion for summary judgment to the extent of granting summary judgment as against Negev, and denied defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the action as against the individual defendant (Gross) for lack of merit and as against Gross and Negev for lack of jurisdiction, unanimously affirmed, without costs. The appeal from the order is unanimously dismissed as subsumed within the appeal from the judgment, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that notwithstanding that Gross signed the lease between plaintiff as landlord and Negev as tenant only in his capacity as Negev’s president, Gross’s initialling of the pages of the typewritten rider, including page 13 containing a clause specifically naming Gross, in boldface letters, as guarantor of Negev’s rent obligations, but with the signature space for the individual guarantee left blank, these conflicting circumstances raises an issue of fact whether the parties intended that Gross should be individually bound by the lease (see, Paribas Props. v Benson, 146 AD2d 522, 525-526, distinguishing Salzman Sign Co. v Beck, 10 NY2d 63, 67). Concerning jurisdiction, the service of the two summonses on Gross was effective to confer jurisdiction on both him and the two Negev defendants (Port Chester Elec. Co. v Ronbed Corp., 28 AD2d 1008). Gross’s assertion that at the time of service he was no longer an officer of Negev is conclusory and insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact in the face of the documentary evidence submitted by plaintiff on the issue. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 92, 603 N.Y.S.2d 843, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerald-syndicate-inc-v-negev-home-made-foods-inc-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack