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.
BAYSTONE EQUITIES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GEREL CORPORATION, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered January 10, 2002, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1), on the ground of a defense supported by documentary evidence, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
While plaintiff's allegations in this action for, inter alia, specific performance of contracts for the sale of real property are, broadly construed, sufficient to withstand dismissal pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), they are nonetheless conclusively refuted by the documentary evidence and, accordingly, dismissal of the complaint was warranted pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) (see Igarashi v. Higashi, 289 A.D.2d 128, 735 N.Y.S.2d 33). Plaintiff purchaser concededly did not timely deliver the deposit required under the subject contracts. Although plaintiff maintains that the contracts were not terminable for this default, the contracts clearly provided that time was of the essence for plaintiff to meet its monetary obligations and, while plaintiff was accorded an extension of its time to deliver the additional deposit, time still remained of the essence. In addition, the contracts, rationally construed, are not consistent with plaintiff's contention that the five-day notice to cure contractually required of the seller as a condition of contract termination in certain circumstances was applicable where termination was predicated on nonpayment of the deposit. Finally, the documentary evidence renders untenable plaintiff's claim that the parties entered into a net lease agreement after the original contracts were terminated.
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: May 20, 2003
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)