Ull v. Lerner

308 A.D.2d 396, 764 N.Y.S.2d 432, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9783
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 25, 2003
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 308 A.D.2d 396 (Ull v. Lerner) 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
Ull v. Lerner, 308 A.D.2d 396, 764 N.Y.S.2d 432, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9783 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered April 11, 2002, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs motion insofar as it sought reargument, and, upon reargument, adhered to the court’s prior order, entered July 24, 2001, granting defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the complaint, and denied plaintiffs motion for leave to serve an amended complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although plaintiff in the complaint sought to assert rights as a tenant-in-common in a lease to operate a parking garage, the documentary evidence conclusively demonstrated that plaintiff assigned rights in the tenancy-in-common to a corporation, and “[i]t is well established that a general, unqualified assignment of one’s rights, title and interest in a lease * * * divests the assignor of all rights * * * existing thereunder” (Singer v Boychuk, 194 AD2d 1049, 1051 [1993], lv denied 82 NY2d 657 [1993]). Plaintiffs postdismissal motion for leave to serve an amended complaint was properly denied, since the viability of the proposed amendments was predicated on plaintiff’s purported status as a shareholder in the corporation assigned the lease to the parking garage from the tenancy-in-common, yet the evidence demonstrated that the only shareholders in the corporation were defendants William and Gertrude Lerner (see Travelers Ins. Co. v Ferco, Inc., 122 AD2d 718 [1986]).

[397]*397We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe and Marlow, JJ.

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

Related

PSW NYC LLC v. Bank of America, N.A.
2017 NY Slip Op 4207 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Zwiebel v. Guttman
26 A.D.3d 429 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Skek Associates v. Benenson
24 A.D.3d 532 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
308 A.D.2d 396, 764 N.Y.S.2d 432, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9783, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ull-v-lerner-nyappdiv-2003.