Madden v. Corey

251 A.D.2d 257, 675 N.Y.S.2d 52, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7792
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 30, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 257 (Madden v. Corey) 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
Madden v. Corey, 251 A.D.2d 257, 675 N.Y.S.2d 52, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7792 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered March 13, 1997, which, upon reargument, adhered to a prior order of the same court and [258]*258Justice entered December 17, 1996, denying plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint and granting defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the action, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from said December 17, 1996 order unanimously dismissed, without costs, as superseded by the appeal from the subsequent March 13, 1997 order.

Plaintiff seeks to recover on a guarantee issued by defendant in connection with two promissory notes in the combined principal amount of $48,000, plus 9% interest from their due dates of January 13, 1984 and December 31, 1985. In plaintiffs voluntary bankruptcy proceeding, he listed the notes and their face amounts, but represented that the total value of his personal property was $9,276.91. The trustee in bankruptcy was apparently convinced by plaintiff that the notes were uncollectible, because he did not seek to recover on them for the benefit of plaintiffs creditors. The doctrine of judicial estoppel, was appropriately applied to prevent plaintiff from now claiming the notes are valid and collectible, in light of the inconsistent position adopted by him in the bankruptcy proceeding (see, Environmental Concern v Larchwood Constr. Corp., 101 AD2d 591, 593; Payless Wholesale Distribs. v Alberto Culver (P. R.) Inc., 989 F2d 570, 571, cert denied 510 US 931). Concur— Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

Related

Bohn v. Tekulsky
2025 NY Slip Op 02848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Simon v. Industry City Distillery, Inc.
2018 NY Slip Op 1643 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Kittner v. Eastern Mutual Insurance
80 A.D.3d 843 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Woodson v. Mendon Leasing Corp.
259 A.D.2d 304 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
251 A.D.2d 257, 675 N.Y.S.2d 52, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/madden-v-corey-nyappdiv-1998.