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.
William GUERRERO, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. WEST 23RD STREET REALTY, LLC, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jane S. Solomon, J.), entered January 25, 2007, dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The causes of action for breach of contract were properly dismissed on defendants' CPLR 3211 motion. Even assuming that the agreement for building management services was modified either orally or by the parties' conduct, the modification, which would have permitted automatic renewal for consecutive one-year periods unless terminated by either party upon 60 days' notice prior to the expiration of the term of the agreement, is rendered unenforceable by General Obligations Law § 5-903 (see Harris v. Adams & Co. Real Estate, 62 Misc.2d 749, 753, 310 N.Y.S.2d 258 [1970] ).
The claim for equitable estoppel was also properly dismissed. To the extent that this claim is based on the alleged renewal of the agreements, it is duplicative of the breach of contract causes of action (see William Kaufman Org. v. Graham & James, 269 A.D.2d 171, 173, 703 N.Y.S.2d 439 [2000] ). To the extent that it is based on the expenditures plaintiffs made in preparation for signing a lease, the claim fails because the lease agreement apparently was never reduced to writing (see Youz Films v. Just Born, Inc., 69 A.D.2d 778, 415 N.Y.S.2d 22 [1979] [“the alleged reliance on the oral agreement is no more than the usual situation of parties who orally agree on a deal, intending that there shall be a written contract, and then at the point of signing, one of the parties backs out”] ).
We have considered plaintiffs' additional arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 15, 2007
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)