Bowman v. Placidi

• Decision Date: 09 March 2006
• Docket Number: 8040.,8040A.
• Citation: 811 N.Y.S.2d 638,2006 NY Slip Op 01712,27 A.D.3d 259
• Parties: JOHN BOWMAN, Individually and as Successor in Title to 2069 Realty, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. GEORGE DI PLACIDI et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

27 A.D.3d 259

811 N.Y.S.2d 638

2006 NY Slip Op 01712

JOHN BOWMAN, Individually and as Successorin Title to 2069 Realty, Inc., et al., Appellants, v.GEORGE DI PLACIDI et al., Respondents.

8040.

8040A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

March 9, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered June 8, 2004, which, inter alia, granted defendants' CPLR 3211 motion insofar as to dismiss the first and second causes of action on statute of frauds grounds, and order, same court and Justice, entered on or about September 9, 2004, which, to the extent appealable, denied plaintiffs' motion for renewal and for leave to amend the complaint to include a cause of action for rescission, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs' claims for breach of an alleged oral contract for the transfer and reconveyance some three years later of a parcel of real property, were properly dismissed since the purported agreement is void under the statute of frauds (seeGeneral Obligations Law §§ 5-701,5-703).Plaintiffs' allegations that they partially performed the agreement are insufficient to remove the agreement from the statute since the conduct relied upon, i.e., delivery of a deed, which did not recite the consideration paid for the property, is...