Silvers v. Silvers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Silvers v. Silvers

267 A.D.2d 298, 699 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12949

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

DecidedDecember 13, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 298 (Silvers v. Silvers) 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

Silvers v. Silvers, 267 A.D.2d 298, 699 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12949 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), dated September 10, 1998, as denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the cause of action asserted by the plaintiff Derek Silvers to recover damages for breach of contract.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The language of the separation agreement dated May 26, 1981, could reasonably be construed to have created a direct benefit for the plaintiff Derek Silvers (see, Fourth Ocean Putnam Corp. v Interstate Wrecking Co., 66 NY2d 38, 44; Goodman-Marks Assocs. v Westbury Post Assocs., 70 AD2d 145). Therefore, in the absence of extrinsic evidence, it may reasonably be inferred that Derek was an intended third-party beneficiary of the agreement. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.), dated September 10, 1998, as denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the cause of action asserted by the plaintiff Derek Silvers to recover damages for breach of contract.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The language of the separation agreement dated May 26, 1981, could reasonably be construed to have created a direct benefit for the plaintiff Derek Silvers (see, Fourth Ocean Putnam Corp. v Interstate Wrecking Co., 66 NY2d 38, 44; Goodman-Marks Assocs. v Westbury Post Assocs., 70 AD2d 145). Therefore, in the absence of extrinsic evidence, it may reasonably be inferred that Derek was an intended third-party beneficiary of the agreement. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 298, 699 N.Y.S.2d 874, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12949, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/silvers-v-silvers-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack