Malekan v. Sakai

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Malekan v. Sakai

85 A.D.3d 451, 924 N.Y.S.2d 271

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

DecidedJune 7, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 85 A.D.3d 451 (Malekan v. Sakai) 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

Malekan v. Sakai, 85 A.D.3d 451, 924 N.Y.S.2d 271 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), entered June 3, 2010, dismissing plaintiff Malekan’s complaint and bringing up for review orders, same court and Justice, entered June 3, [452]*4522010, which, inter alia, granted the Sakai defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and declared that Sakai Antiques, Inc. (Sakai) is the rightful owner of the subject antique, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court correctly determined that Sakai is the rightful owner of the antique. Plaintiff Malekan’s contention that the agreement in Farsi was an agreement to forbear, akin to a covenant not to sue, lacks support in the record. Furthermore, there is no dispute that Malekan also signed a bill of sale written in English concerning the antique, and under the circumstances, Malekan is bound by what he signed (see Shklovskiy v Khan, 273 AD2d 371, 372 [2000]).

We have reviewed Malekan’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Renwick and Román, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), entered June 3, 2010, dismissing plaintiff Malekan’s complaint and bringing up for review orders, same court and Justice, entered June 3, [452]*4522010, which, inter alia, granted the Sakai defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and declared that Sakai Antiques, Inc. (Sakai) is the rightful owner of the subject antique, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court correctly determined that Sakai is the rightful owner of the antique. Plaintiff Malekan’s contention that the agreement in Farsi was an agreement to forbear, akin to a covenant not to sue, lacks support in the record. Furthermore, there is no dispute that Malekan also signed a bill of sale written in English concerning the antique, and under the circumstances, Malekan is bound by what he signed (see Shklovskiy v Khan, 273 AD2d 371, 372 [2000]).

We have reviewed Malekan’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Renwick and Román, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 A.D.3d 451, 924 N.Y.S.2d 271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malekan-v-sakai-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack