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.
Jacques MATAS, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. ALPARGATAS S.A.I.C., Defendant-Appellant.
Judgement, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered September 21, 1999, which granted plaintiffs summary judgment in lieu of complaint in the amount of $1,767,133.00 plus interest, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the judgment vacated. Plaintiffs are directed to serve a complaint within 20 days of the date of service of a copy of this order with notice of entry.
CPLR 3213 provides an accelerated procedure for commencement and pursuit of an action where a right to payment can be ascertained from the face of a document, without regard to extrinsic evidence. To establish a prima facie case, plaintiff must present an “instrument for the payment of money only” and evidence of a failure to make the payment called for by its terms (Interman Indus. Products Ltd. v. R.S.M. Electron Power, 37 N.Y.2d 151, 155, 371 N.Y.S.2d 675, 332 N.E.2d 859 [action did not qualify for accelerated treatment absent written instrument by which defendant was obligated to make payment] ).
Through Merrill Lynch, plaintiffs purchased “custodial receipts” representing a beneficial interest of $1,440,000 in a portion of the 9.00% convertible bonds of defendant Alpargatas S.A.I.C. However, the certificates of ownership of these “custodial receipts” were not subscribed by Alpargatas S.A.I.C., and thus did not evince that plaintiffs were registered holders of any of the securities issued by defendant. Prior to instituting this suit, plaintiffs sought to obtain definitive securities representing their interests by exchanging their custodial receipts for the actual bond certificates, which they admit that they never received from defendant. It cannot be ascertained from the face of these documents, without regard to extrinsic evidence, that plaintiffs have a right to repayment and, accordingly, they do not possess an “instrument for the payment of money only”. Thus, this action is not eligible for CPLR 3213 treatment.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: July 13, 2000
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)