General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Norstar Bank of Hudson Valley

• Decision Date: 21 December 1989
• Citation: 549 N.Y.S.2d 862,156 A.D.2d 876
• Parties: In the Matter of GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, Respondent, v. NORSTAR BANK OF HUDSON VALLEY et al., Respondents, and Lefty's Char-Broil of America, Inc., Intervenor-Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 862

549 N.Y.S.2d 862

156 A.D.2d 876

In the Matter of GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, Respondent, v. NORSTAR BANK OF HUDSON VALLEY et al., Respondents and Lefty's Char-Broil of America, Inc., Intervenor-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Department.

Dec. 21, 1989.

Robert Fink, Goshen, for General Motors Acceptance Corp. respondent.

Before MAHONEY, P.J., and CASEY, YESAWICH, LEVINE and HARVEY, JJ.

MAHONEY, Presiding Justice.

Appeal from an amended judgment of the Supreme Court (Williams, J.), entered May 25, 1989 in Sullivan County, which granted petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5225(b), to direct respondent Norstar Bank of Hudson Valley to turn over $21,292.36 plus interest to petitioner.

Respondent Allan Schuster owned all the stock in Lefty's Char-Broil, Ltd. (hereinafter Lefty's). Pursuant to a master agreement dated February 26, 1987, Schuster agreed to sell that stock to intervenor, Lefty's Char-Broil of America, Inc. (hereinafter America). In this agreement, Schuster further acknowledged that Lefty's owed $47,214.90 to Martin Herzog and Ida Herzog and agreed to personally satisfy this debt within 10 days. According to America, the debt has not been satisfied although $47,214.90 was placed in an escrow account at respondent Norstar Bank of Hudson Valley's predecessor.

Meanwhile, petitioner obtained a judgment against Schuster for $21,292.36. In response to an information subpoena from petitioner, Norstar listed the above account. Petitioner then commenced this proceeding pursuant to CPLR 5225(b) for an order directing Norstar to turn over to the Sheriff from the subject account an amount sufficient to satisfy the judgment. America intervened, claiming that the subject account was an escrow account held by respondent Bernard Levine, who was Schuster's attorney in the stock sale, to ensure payment of the debt to the Herzogs. Thus, America contends that Schuster has no interest in the account to satisfy petitioner's judgment. The parties appeared in Supreme Court but no testimony was taken. Supreme Court determined from the submissions that there was no valid escrow agreement and granted petitioner's application for an order requiring Norstar to turn over $21,292.36 plus interest to satisfy petitioner's judgment against Schuster. From the amended judgment entered thereon, America appeals.

Although a court may grant summary relief where there are no questions of fact in a special...