Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co.
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Writing for the Court | PETER B. SKELOS |
| Citation | Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co., 97 A.D.3d 713, 948 N.Y.S.2d 658, 2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 5607 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012) |
| Decision Date | 18 July 2012 |
| Parties | CIVES CORPORATION, appellant, v. GEORGE A. FULLER COMPANY, INC., defendant, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, respondent. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Goldberg & Connolly, Rockville Centre, N.Y. (Mitchell B. Reiter and William J. Tinsley, Jr., of counsel), for appellant.
Wolff & Samson, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Andrew S. Kent of counsel), for respondent.
PETER B. SKELOS, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, ARIEL E. BELEN, and SHERI S. ROMAN, JJ.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Loehr, J.), entered April 25, 2011, which granted the motion of the defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it is denied.
The defendant George A. Fuller Company, Inc. (hereinafter Fuller), was the general contractor on a construction project known as the Concord Hotel & Casino–Retail–Event Center–Ballroom, located in Kiamesha Lake (hereinafter the Project). The plaintiff contracted with Fuller to provide labor and materials for the Project. The defendant Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (hereinafter Liberty) allegedly issued a payment bond in connection with the Project.
After supplying labor and materials for the Project, the plaintiff submitted invoices to Fuller in the amount of $8,952,294, but Fuller allegedly failed to pay the invoices. The plaintiff then submitted a claim to Liberty for payment under the payment bond, but Liberty refused to pay the claim. The plaintiff then commenced this action, inter alia, to recover damages for Liberty's breach of its obligations under the payment bond. It attached a copy of Liberty's alleged payment bond to its summons and complaint.
Liberty moved pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it, arguing that the bond had no legal effect. It claimed that it had only released the bond to Fuller to be held in escrow subject to certain conditions in an escrow agreement, that those conditions had never been met and, thus, the bond had never been released from escrow, never become effective, and was returned to it by Fuller. To establish the existence of the escrow agreement and the fact that the terms of the agreement were never met, Liberty submitted, inter alia, various letters and emails. The Supreme Court granted Liberty's motion. The plaintiff appeals and we reverse.
“A motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) will be granted only if the documentary evidence resolves all factual issues as a matter of law, and conclusively disposes of the plaintiff's claim” ( Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.D.3d 78, 83, 898 N.Y.S.2d 569 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Reid v. Gateway Sherman, Inc., 60 A.D.3d 836, 837, 875 N.Y.S.2d 254). The evidence submitted in support of such motion must be “ ‘documentary’ ” or the motion must be denied ( Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.D.3d at 84, 898 N.Y.S.2d 569, quoting Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons. Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C 3211:10, at 22). In order for evidence submitted under a CPLR 3211(a)(1) motion to qualify as “documentary evidence,” it must be “unambiguous, authentic, and undeniable” ( Granada Condominium III Assn. v. Palomino, 78 A.D.3d 996, 996–997, 913 N.Y.S.2d 668 [internal quotation marks omitted] ). “[J]udicial records, as well as documents reflecting out-of-court transactions such as mortgages, deeds, contracts, and any other papers, the contents of which are essentially undeniable,...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Palmieri v. Biggiani
...failed to present documentary evidence conclusively establishing a defense as a matter of law ( see Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co., Inc., 97 A.D.3d 713, 714, 948 N.Y.S.2d 658;Granada Condominium III Assn. v. Palomino, 78 A.D.3d 996, 997, 913 N.Y.S.2d 668;Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.......
-
Fin. Assistance, Inc. v. Graham
...and of undisputed authenticity" ( Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.D.3d 78, 86, 898 N.Y.S.2d 569 ; see Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co., Inc., 97 A.D.3d 713, 714, 948 N.Y.S.2d 658 ). Here, Popular Bank established its entitlement to dismissal of the amended complaint insofar as asserted ag......
-
Dimauro v. Untied LLC
...transactions such as mortgages, deeds and contracts clearly qualify as "documentary evidence," (Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co., Inc., 97 A.D.3d 713, 714, 948 N.Y.S.2d 658, quoting Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.D.3d at 83 [internal quotations omitted]), affidavits and deposition testim......
-
Gawrych v. Astoria Fed. Sav. & Loan
...Ins. Co., 127 A.D.3d 850, 851, 7 N.Y.S.3d 325 ; Attias v. Costiera, 120 A.D.3d 1281, 993 N.Y.S.2d 59 ; Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co., Inc., 97 A.D.3d 713, 948 N.Y.S.2d 658 ; Fontanetta v. John Doe 1, 73 A.D.3d at 89, 898 N.Y.S.2d 569 ). On a motion to dismiss for failure to state a ca......
-
The First and Second Departments Split on What is Considered “Documentary Evidence” on a Motion to Dismiss Under CPLR 3211(a)(1)
...did not constitute ‘documentary evidence’ for the purposes of CPLR 3211 (a)(1).”[18] The Second Department’s decision in Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co., Inc. is instructive.[19] In Cives, the plaintiff sued Fuller, a general contractor, and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company for payment ......