Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. v. Westreich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. v. Westreich

213 A.D.2d 238, 624 N.Y.S.2d 8, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2752

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

DecidedMarch 14, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 213 A.D.2d 238 (Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. v. Westreich) 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

Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. v. Westreich, 213 A.D.2d 238, 624 N.Y.S.2d 8, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2752 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered October 29, 1993, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint and granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the action as time-barred, unan[239]*239imously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying defendant’s motion, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs action to recover on a promissory note, which was not commenced until 1993, was dismissed by the IAS Court as time barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations (see, CPLR 213; UCC 3-122), because the demand note was executed in 1986.

However, there was an issue of fact raised as to whether the periodic payments and borrowings against the loan, payments of interest, and repayments of principal took place within six years of the commencement of this action and might serve to extend the Statute of Limitations. Further, an issue of fact was raised as to whether defendant acknowledged her debt to plaintiff in a March 1992 financial statement, which would also extend the limitations period. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered October 29, 1993, which denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint and granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the action as time-barred, unan[239]*239imously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying defendant’s motion, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs action to recover on a promissory note, which was not commenced until 1993, was dismissed by the IAS Court as time barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations (see, CPLR 213; UCC 3-122), because the demand note was executed in 1986.

However, there was an issue of fact raised as to whether the periodic payments and borrowings against the loan, payments of interest, and repayments of principal took place within six years of the commencement of this action and might serve to extend the Statute of Limitations. Further, an issue of fact was raised as to whether defendant acknowledged her debt to plaintiff in a March 1992 financial statement, which would also extend the limitations period. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Asch, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 A.D.2d 238, 624 N.Y.S.2d 8, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2752, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morgan-guaranty-trust-co-v-westreich-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack