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.
HDA PARKING DEVELOPERS, INC., appellant, v. MOUNT VERNON HOSPITAL, INC., et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.), dated July 30, 1998, which, inter alia, granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment since there are no triable issues of fact. The documentary and other evidence presented on the motions establish that the plaintiff developer and the defendant Mount Vernon Hospital (hereinafter the hospital) never entered into an enforceable contract but only memorialized their intent to form, in the future, a joint venture to acquire, renovate, and operate a parking garage then owned by the City of Mount Vernon. The parties' signed letter of intent expressly stated that it “was not a final agreement and does not encompass all the terms and conditions of the agreement to be reached” but that the parties would form a joint venture when the plaintiff secured an agreement from the City of Mount Vernon to sell or lease the subject parking garage. Moreover, the hospital opted out of the anticipated joint venture, as permitted by the letter of intent, when it became apparent that this joint venture could never be formed due to the City's refusal to sell or lease the garage to a joint venture involving a developer. Since no final or complete agreement was ever reached between the parties, the plaintiff has no cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract (see, Cobble Hill Nursing Home v. Henry & Warren Corp., 74 N.Y.2d 475, 548 N.Y.S.2d 920, 548 N.E.2d 203, cert. denied 498 U.S. 816, 111 S.Ct. 58, 112 L.Ed.2d 33; Martin Delicatessen v. Schumacher, 52 N.Y.2d 105, 436 N.Y.S.2d 247, 417 N.E.2d 541).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: April 05, 1999
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)