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.
Harlem Real Estate LLC, et al., Plaintiff-Appellants, v. New York City Economic Development Corporation, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
_
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karen S. Smith, J.), entered June 10, 2009, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and declaring in their favor on their counterclaims, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny the part of the motion that seeks to dismiss the first cause of action and to declare in defendants' favor on that cause of action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered October 28, 2009, which, upon reargument of defendants' motion, adhered to the original determination, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.
In opposition to defendants' motion, plaintiffs failed to show that “facts essential to justify opposition may [have] exist[ed] but [could not] then be stated” so as to warrant the additional disclosure they sought (CPLR 3212 [f] ). In light of the existing record, it is clear that further discovery would reveal no evidence that would raise an issue of fact as to the validity of the conditions subsequent in the Harlem property contract and deed.
Further, the record presents no issue of fact whether plaintiffs' subsequent lease in the Bronx obviated their obligations with respect to the Harlem property. Indeed, the parties entered into a modification of the original deed to the Harlem property that reaffirmed the original conditions subsequent.
We have considered plaintiffs' remaining contentions and find them without merit.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
_
CLERK
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.
Docket No: 4531- 4532
Decided: March 17, 2011
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)