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.
MATRIX BELLPORT, LLC, respondent, v. CREST BELLPORT, LLC, et al., appellants.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover on a promissory note and personal guaranty, commenced by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Elizabeth H. Emerson, J), entered May 3, 2021. The judgment, upon an order of the same court dated March 11, 2021, granting the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the total sum of $2,514,590.66.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The defendant Crest Bellport, LLC (hereinafter the LLC), by its manager, the defendant Enrico Scarda, executed a promissory note in favor of the plaintiff. Scarda personally guaranteed the LLC's obligations under the note. The LLC allegedly defaulted on the note. The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendants to recover on the note and guaranty by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213. In an order dated March 11, 2021, the Supreme Court granted the motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint. On May 3, 2021, a judgment was entered upon the order in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants in the total sum of $2,514,590.66. The defendants appeal.
The plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law through its submission of the promissory note, which contained an unequivocal and unconditional obligation to pay, the guaranty, and evidence that the defendants failed to make payment in accordance with the terms of those instruments (see Margarella v. Ullian, 164 A.D.3d 898, 899, 83 N.Y.S.3d 569; Assevero v. Rihan, 144 A.D.3d 1061, 1062, 42 N.Y.S.3d 300). In opposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to a bona fide defense to nonpayment (see Margarella v. Ullian, 164 A.D.3d at 899, 83 N.Y.S.3d 569; Castle Restoration & Constr., Inc. v. Castle Restoration, LLC, 122 A.D.3d 789, 790, 997 N.Y.S.2d 147).
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.
DILLON, J.P., MILLER, WOOTEN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
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.
Docket No: 2021–04315
Decided: August 16, 2023
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)