Hindes v. Weisz
| Decision Date | 10 March 2003 |
| Parties | GLORIA HINDES, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>STANLEY WEISZ et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.
The parties herein were partners in MSG Associates (hereinafter MSG), which owned and operated commercial real property. On December 15, 1999, the parties executed a settlement agreement (hereinafter the agreement) in which the defendants agreed to pay the plaintiff $550,000 for her interest in MSG so that MSG could sell certain real property to nonparty purchaser Calco Development, Ltd. (hereinafter Calco). Under paragraph 5 of the agreement, it was agreed that should the closing costs for the real estate sale total less than $497,000, the plaintiff would receive 25% of the difference between the sum of $497,000 and MSG's actual closing costs. By contrast, if the closing costs exceeded $497,000, the plaintiff would not be entitled to any additional payments.
The $497,000 sum was presented to the plaintiff with the following allocable line item expenses: real estate taxes of $232,000; tenants' security deposits required to be adjusted and paid to the purchaser in the sum of $75,000; and payments to third-party trade creditors in the sum of $55,000. The direct closing expenses totaled $100,000 and included real estate transfer taxes, costs of recording the satisfaction of mortgage, and legal fees no more than $35,000. In addition, "John Corcoran" was allocated a total of $35,000.
Following the agreement, MSG asserted that its closing costs totaled $503,385.70. The costs included real estate taxes in the sum of $239,184.30; tenants' security in the amount of $78,091.10 with $1,800 returned to Giant Industrial Installation (hereinafter Giant Industrial) for a total of $79,891.10; payments to trade creditors in the sum of $34,647.30; payments to "John Corcoran" in the sum of $35,000; direct closing costs of State Bank in the amount of $30,688 that included a mortgage tax payment of $18,333; legal fees in the sum of $35,000; an environmental closing statement payment from MSG to Deer Park Technology on behalf of Calco in the sum of $47,500; and an environmental closing statement payment to the New York State Department of Health (hereinafter NYSDOH) in the sum of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Popovich v. Sony Music Entertainment, Inc.
...if the contractual terms are unambiguous and the court can make a ruling as a matter of law. See, e.g., Hindes v. Weisz, 303 A.D.2d 459, 460-61, 756 N.Y.S.2d 601 (N.Y.App.Div.2003). "If there is ambiguity in the terminology used, however, and determination of the intent of the parties depen......
-
Morton v. 338 W. 46TH St. Realty, LLC
...a motion for summary judgment, the court may and should resolve them without the need for a testimonial hearing (Hindes v. Weisz, 303 A.D.2d 459, 756 N.Y.S.2d 601 [2d Dept.2003] ). The base date for determining the lawful rent is four years prior to the date that the complaint of rent overc......
-
Chacha v. Metro. Museum Of Art And
...with a motion for summary judgment, the court may and should resolve it without the need for a testimonial hearing. See Hindes v. Weisz. 303 A.D.2d 459 (2d Dept. 2003)Discussion Labor Law § 241 (6) Labor Law § 241(6) imposes a non-delegable duty upon owners and contractors to provide reason......
-
Manzano v. Riverbend Hous. Co. Inc
...with a motion for summary judgment, the court may and should resolve it without the need for a testimonial hearing. See Hindes v. Weisz. 303 A.D.2d 459 (2d Dept. 2003).Discussion Labor Law § 241 (6) Labor Law § 241 (6) imposes a non-delegable duty upon owners and contractorsto provide reaso......