In re Ballirano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Ballirano

248 A.D.2d 612, 669 N.Y.S.2d 930, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2919

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

DecidedMarch 23, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D.2d 612 (In re Ballirano) 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

In re Ballirano, 248 A.D.2d 612, 669 N.Y.S.2d 930, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding for the judicial dissolution of a corporation, the petitioners appeal from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered October 29, 1996, as, upon confirming a Referee’s determination, made after a hearing, inter alia, adopted a document entitled “Alternative Calculation” for determining the amounts owed by Eugene Feeley to the corporation.

Ordered that the order and judgment is modified by deleting from the fourth decretal paragraph thereof the provision that the award of the Referee shall be deemed to have been made without interest and substituting therefor a provision awarding interest at the rate of 9% per annum from February 10, 1993, on the amount indicated in the “Alternative Calculation” as the amount owed by Eugene Feeley to the corporation; as so modified, the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the appellants’ contention that the order of reference did not permit the Referee to modify the provision in the judgment of dissolution which stated that Eugene Feeley was to pay interest at a rate of 9% per annum from February 10, 1993, on the sums owed by him to the corporation (see, Chang v Chang, 190 AD2d 311, 319).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding for the judicial dissolution of a corporation, the petitioners appeal from so much of an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered October 29, 1996, as, upon confirming a Referee’s determination, made after a hearing, inter alia, adopted a document entitled “Alternative Calculation” for determining the amounts owed by Eugene Feeley to the corporation.

Ordered that the order and judgment is modified by deleting from the fourth decretal paragraph thereof the provision that the award of the Referee shall be deemed to have been made without interest and substituting therefor a provision awarding interest at the rate of 9% per annum from February 10, 1993, on the amount indicated in the “Alternative Calculation” as the amount owed by Eugene Feeley to the corporation; as so modified, the order and judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the appellants’ contention that the order of reference did not permit the Referee to modify the provision in the judgment of dissolution which stated that Eugene Feeley was to pay interest at a rate of 9% per annum from February 10, 1993, on the sums owed by him to the corporation (see, Chang v Chang, 190 AD2d 311, 319).

The appellants’ remaining contentions are without merit.

Bracken, J. P., Rosenblatt, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 612, 669 N.Y.S.2d 930, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-ballirano-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack