J. Sackaris & Sons, Inc. v. Onekey

60 A.D.3d 733, 873 N.Y.S.2d 919
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 10, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 60 A.D.3d 733 (J. Sackaris & Sons, Inc. v. Onekey) 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
J. Sackaris & Sons, Inc. v. Onekey, 60 A.D.3d 733, 873 N.Y.S.2d 919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, pursuant to Debtor and Creditor Law article 10 to set aside certain transfers as fraudulent, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brandveen, J.), entered June 20, 2007, as denied that branch of its motion which [734]*734was pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (3) to dismiss the complaint, and (2) from so much of an order of the same court entered September 7, 2007, as, in effect, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the order entered June 20, 2007, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order entered September 7, 2007, made, in effect, upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered September 7, 2007, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the respondent.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Supreme Court did not err in denying that branch of its motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (3) to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff, as a dissolved corporation, lacks the legal capacity to sue. Since the claim underlying this suit is an alleged breach of contract which occurred in 1998, prior to the plaintiffs dissolution, it was properly permitted to pursue that claim in the course of winding up its affairs (see Business Corporation Law § 1006 [b]; Tedesco v A.P. Green Indus., Inc., 8 NY3d 243 [2007]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Greater Bright Light Home Care Services, Inc. v. Jeffries-El
2017 NY Slip Op 4821 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Lance International, Inc. v. First National City Bank
86 A.D.3d 479 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Lance International, Inc. v. First National City Bank
27 Misc. 3d 13 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 A.D.3d 733, 873 N.Y.S.2d 919, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-sackaris-sons-inc-v-onekey-nyappdiv-2009.