Parker v. Rich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Parker v. Rich

205 A.D.2d 408, 614 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6502

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

DecidedJune 23, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 408 (Parker v. Rich) 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

Parker v. Rich, 205 A.D.2d 408, 614 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6502 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Amended order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Finger-hood, J.), entered December 18, 1992, which, insofar as appealed from, awarded plaintiff $407,303.35 and failed to grant defendant’s motion for sanctions and attorney’s fees, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of [409]*409amending the amount awarded to $322,602.24, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

As plaintiff concedes, the IAS Court improperly calculated the interest payable on the basis of the fair market value of the cooperative shares as determined by the Special Referee. Such calculation should have been based upon the sum remaining after subtracting the insider price and interest that defendant had already paid, and then adding the use and occupancy owed.

We have considered defendant’s contentions regarding the denial of sanctions and attorney’s fees and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

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

Amended order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Finger-hood, J.), entered December 18, 1992, which, insofar as appealed from, awarded plaintiff $407,303.35 and failed to grant defendant’s motion for sanctions and attorney’s fees, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of [409]*409amending the amount awarded to $322,602.24, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

As plaintiff concedes, the IAS Court improperly calculated the interest payable on the basis of the fair market value of the cooperative shares as determined by the Special Referee. Such calculation should have been based upon the sum remaining after subtracting the insider price and interest that defendant had already paid, and then adding the use and occupancy owed.

We have considered defendant’s contentions regarding the denial of sanctions and attorney’s fees and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Ross, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 408, 614 N.Y.S.2d 130, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-rich-nyappdiv-1994.