Reynaers Inc. v. A.G.M. Deco Inc.
| Decision Date | 30 March 2022 |
| Docket Number | Index 510147/19 |
| Citation | 2022 NY Slip Op 31029 (U) |
| Parties | REYNAERS INC., Plaintiff, v. A.G.M. DECO INC., Defendant, A.G.M. DEGO INC., Counterclaim Plaintiff, v. REYNAERS INC., Counterclaim Defendant, |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
DECISION AND ORDER
The plaintiff and counterclaim defendant Raynaers inc., has moved pursuant to CPIR §3211 seeking to dismiss the seventh counterclaim filed by the defendant A.G.M. The defendant and counterclaim plaintiff has opposed the motion. Papers were submitted by the parties and arguments held. After reviewing all the arguments this court now makes this following determination.
As previously recorded, from 2013 to 2019 the defendant A.G.M agreed to buy window and door products from Reynaers at agreed upon prices. During 2Q17 A.G.M. began to fall behind in payments due and by the time a lawsuit was commenced they owed over two: million dollars. The complaint asserts causes of action for breach: of contract, goods sold and delivered and account stated. A.G.M. answered and asserted various Counterclaims. All of the counterclaims were dismissed except for the seventh counterclaim which alleged the invoices submitted were for prices that were higher than agreed upon by the parties. The court held that counterclaim, although vague, was appropriately the subject of discovery and ordered the parties to engage in such discovery. The parties have engaged in such discovery and now Reynaers moves seeking to dismiss the counterclaim on the grounds it has no merit.
It is well settled that upon a motion to dismiss the court must determine, accepting the allegations of the counterclaims as true, whether the party can succeed upon any reasonable view of those facts (Strujan v. Kaufman & Kahn, LLP 168 A.D.3d 1114, 93 N.Y.S.3d 334 [2d Dept., 2019]). Further, all the allegations contained within the counterclaims are deemed true and all reasonable inferences may be drawn in favor of the party that has alleged such counterclaims (Weiss v. Lowenberg, 95 A.D.3d 405, 944 N.Y.S.2d 27 [1st Dept., 2012]). Whether the counterclaims will later survive a motion for summary judgment, or whether the party will ultimately be able to prove its claims, of course, plays no part in the determination of a pre-discovery CPLR §3211 motion to dismiss (see, Moskowitz v. Masliansk v, 198 A.D.3d 637, 155 N.Y.S.3d 414 [2021])..
Paragraphs 110 and 111 of the answer with counterclaims states that "without just cause, Reynaers submitted invoices to AGM at rates higher than the rates agreed upon, overcharging AGM on. windows and. doors delivered for several projects including, but not limited to, Krarise, 22-12 Jackson, 10 Montieth and Ditmas Park...For the foregoing reasons, AGM is entitled to...
To continue reading
Request your trial