Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Scot M. LANEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. James N. SIEWERT, Defendant-Appellant, Broadway Eleven Owners, Inc., et al., Defendants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered February 17, 2005, which, in an action for partition and fraud, inter alia, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to dismiss the cause of action for fraud, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
The parties took title to the shares allocated to the subject apartment in 1985 as tenants in common. While defendant's evidence that he paid virtually all of the apartment's purchase price and carrying costs is sufficient to rebut the presumption that the parties are entitled to an equal number of shares on partition (cf. Estate of Menon v. Menon, 303 A.D.2d 622, 623, 756 N.Y.S.2d 639 [2003]; McVicker v. Sarma, 163 A.D.2d 721, 722, 558 N.Y.S.2d 997 [1990] ), such evidence does not resolve what, if anything, plaintiff's share should be. That issue is not amenable to summary judgment treatment, requiring as it does consideration of the various equities (see Ranninger v. Pevsner, 306 A.D.2d 20, 759 N.Y.S.2d 661 [2003], citing, inter alia, McVicker, id.), including the nature of the parties' relationship and whether, as plaintiff claims, defendant intended his disparate contributions to be a gift (see Rettig v. Holler, 2003 N.Y. Slip Op. 51501[U] [Sup. Ct., N.Y. County, Sept. 16, 2003], 1 Misc.3d 904(A), 2003 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1599, 2003 WL 22976599). The cause of action for fraud is dismissed on consent of plaintiff's attorney at oral argument.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 09, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)