U. S. Concord, Inc. v. Koss Co-Graphics, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

U. S. Concord, Inc. v. Koss Co-Graphics, Inc.

201 A.D.2d 317, 607 N.Y.S.2d 31

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

DecidedFebruary 8, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 201 A.D.2d 317 (U. S. Concord, Inc. v. Koss Co-Graphics, Inc.) 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

U. S. Concord, Inc. v. Koss Co-Graphics, Inc., 201 A.D.2d 317, 607 N.Y.S.2d 31 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered on or about March 5, 1993, which, in an action on a promissory note against the maker and guarantors, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants’ opposition to the motions was insufficient to raise an issue of fact that plaintiff orally waived the no-oral-modification provision in the parties’ security agreement governing the note in issue, and agreed to release defendants from their liability thereon. Moreover, the alleged waiver was still executory at the time plaintiff demanded payment from the guarantors, and thus could be withdrawn (compare, Blackman DeStefano Real Estate v Smith, 157 AD2d 932, 934, with Congress Talcott Corp. v Shapiro, 176 AD2d 551). We have considered the remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered on or about March 5, 1993, which, in an action on a promissory note against the maker and guarantors, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants’ opposition to the motions was insufficient to raise an issue of fact that plaintiff orally waived the no-oral-modification provision in the parties’ security agreement governing the note in issue, and agreed to release defendants from their liability thereon. Moreover, the alleged waiver was still executory at the time plaintiff demanded payment from the guarantors, and thus could be withdrawn (compare, Blackman DeStefano Real Estate v Smith, 157 AD2d 932, 934, with Congress Talcott Corp. v Shapiro, 176 AD2d 551). We have considered the remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman and Ross, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

201 A.D.2d 317, 607 N.Y.S.2d 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/u-s-concord-inc-v-koss-co-graphics-inc-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack