L.D. Wenger Const., Co., Inc. v. UnBuildit, Inc.
| Decision Date | 11 May 2010 |
| Citation | 73 A.D.3d 864,899 N.Y.S.2d 885 |
| Parties | L.D. WENGER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., respondent, v. UnBUILDIT, INC., et al., appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
73 A.D.3d 864
L.D. WENGER CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., respondent,
v.
UnBUILDIT, INC., et al., appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
May 11, 2010.
Marshall M. Stern, P.C., Huntington Station, N.Y. (Judith Donnenfeld of counsel), for appellants.
Milber Makris Plousadis & Seiden, Woodbury, N.Y. (Joseph J. Cooke of counsel), for respondent.
In an action, inter alia, to enforce a trust pursuant to Lien Law article 3-A, the defendants appeal from (1) a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.), entered April 29, 2008, which, upon so much of an order of the same court dated April 15, 2008, as, in effect, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary judgment on the cause of action to enforce a trust pursuant to Lien Law article 3-A, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $38,147, and (2) an order of the same court dated December 3, 2008.
ORDERED that the appeal from the order dated December 3, 2008, is dismissed as abandoned; and it is further,
ORDERED that judgment is affirmed; and it is further,
ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff.
In moving for summary judgment on its cause of action to enforce a trust pursuant to Lien Law article 3-A, the plaintiff, the subrogee of the sole trust beneficiary's trust claim ( see Lien Law § 77[1] ), demonstrated its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572). The plaintiff established, prima facie, that the defendant UnBuildIt, Inc. (hereinafter UnBuildIt), improperly diverted trust assets, in that it paid, transferred, or applied trust assets for non-trust purposes before paying the trust claim ( see Lien Law § 72[1]; see also Lien Law § 75[4]; People v. Rosano, 50 N.Y.2d 1013, 1016, 431 N.Y.S.2d 683, 409 N.E.2d 1357). The plaintiff also established, prima facie, that the defendant
Charles Fraser, who owned and controlled UnBuildIt, participated in that breach of trust ( see Lien Law § 77[3][a][i]; South Carolina Steel Corp. v. Miller, 170 A.D.2d 592, 594-595, 566 N.Y.S.2d 368; cf. Medco Plumbing, Inc. v. Sparrow Constr. Corp., 22 A.D.3d 647, 648-649, 802 N.Y.S.2d 730). Since, in opposition, UnBuildIt and Fraser failed to raise a triable issue of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for summary...To continue reading
Request your trial
- ACC Concrete Corp. v. Core Cont'l Constr., LLC
- Gross v. Johnson
-
Kung v. Zheng
...with the plaintiffs, excluded controlled inspections and construction phase field visits, the plaintiffs succeeded in raising triable [73 A.D.3d 864] issues of fact ( see Tiffany at Westbury Condominium v. Marelli Dev. Corp., 40 A.D.3d 1073, 1075–1076, 840 N.Y.S.2d 74; Board of Educ. of Cit......
- Marmer v. IF U.S. Exp., Inc.
-
B. Lien Law § 76 and Election of Remedies
...Co. v. 81 & 3 of Watertown, 1 A.D.3d 1054, 769 N.Y.S.2d 343 [4th Dep't 2003]; see also L.D. Wenger Constr. Co., Inc. v. UnBuildit, Inc., 73 A.D.3d 864, 899 N.Y.S.2d 885 [2d Dep't 2010]; Greenway Plaza Office Park-1, LLC v. Metro Constr., 4 A.D.3d 328, 771 N.Y.S.2d 532 [2d Dep't 2004]; ("whe......