Swing v. LeChase

236 A.D.2d 884, 653 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1892
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 7, 1997
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 884 (Swing v. LeChase) 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
Swing v. LeChase, 236 A.D.2d 884, 653 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly dismissed the first cause of action alleging breach of contract. The parties’ Non-Binding Letter of Intent Agreement leaves several material terms for future negotiations and expressly provides that it is "not binding” and "preliminary to the negotiation of a Lease Agreement.” The parties never entered into a binding contract but merely expressed their "intent to negotiate the essential terms of a binding agreement” (Aces Mech. Corp. v Cohen Bros. Realty & Constr. Corp., 136 AD2d 503, 505; see, Martin Delicatessen v Schumacher, 52 NY2d 105, 109-110; American Energy Prods. Corp. v Keene Corp., 72 AD2d 514).

The court erred, however, in failing to dismiss the second cause of action alleging fraud. The complaint alleges that defendants asserted their intention to enter into a lease agreement with plaintiff but failed to do so. "Although a false representation as to a state of mind may be a false representation of a material fact (Deyo v. Hudson, 225 N. Y. 605, 612), it does not follow that every broken promise acted upon is actionable. Mere promissory statements as to what will be done in the future are not actionable” (Adams v Clark, 239 NY 403, 410; see, Margrove Inc. v Lincoln First Bank, 54 AD2d 1105). We therefore modify the order by granting defendants’ motion and dismissing the second cause of action. (Appeals from Order of [885]*885Supreme Court, Monroe County, Stander, J.—Dismiss Causes of Action.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Doerr, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

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

Related

Lasher v. Albion Central School District
38 A.D.3d 1197 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
236 A.D.2d 884, 653 N.Y.S.2d 474, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/swing-v-lechase-nyappdiv-1997.