— A Peggy Nestor et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. LLC (2022)

.2022–00778

2022–00779

Jason J. Rebhun, P.C., New York (Jason J. Rebhun of counsel), for appellants.

Mahon, Mahon, Kerins & O'Brien LLC, Garden City (James Kerins of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul A. Goetz, J.), entered January 27, 2022, which granted defendant Public Administrator of Nassau County's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.  Order, same court and Justice, entered on or about January 31, 2022, which denied the motion of plaintiffs Peggy Nestor and Marianne Nestor for discovery as moot in light of the summary judgment order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant met its summary judgment burden by proffering copies of the stipulations of discontinuance, with prejudice, that were entered in the earlier partition and quiet title actions, as well as the so-ordered stipulation that released defendant from any monetary liability regarding the property in question.  When parties set forth their agreement in a clear, complete document, the writing should be “enforced according to its terms,” and “[e]vidence outside the four corners of the document as to what was really intended but unstated or misstated is generally inadmissible to add to or vary the writing” (W.W.W. Assoc. v. Giancontieri, 77 N.Y.2d 157, 162 [1990] ).

The Court also properly denied plaintiffs' discovery motion.  There has been no showing that the defendant's conduct was “willful or contumacious”;  indeed, there was no order requiring disclosure and the parties did not appear for a preliminary conference (see e.g. Corner Realty

v Bernstein Mgt. Corp., 249 A.D.2d 191, 193 [1st Dept 1998] ).  Defendant persuasively argues that it did not comply with the discovery demands because the case was meritless in light of the so-ordered stipulation.  Furthermore, as the court properly determined that the case would be dismissed based on the documentary evidence submitted, the discovery motion was properly denied as moot (Matter of Hearst Corp. v. Clyne, 50 N.Y.2d 707, 713–714 [1980] ).

We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments, and find them unavailing.