Rhodia, Inc. v. Steel
| Decision Date | 10 June 1969 |
| Citation | 32 A.D.2d 753,300 N.Y.S.2d 1005 |
| Parties | RHODIA, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Nat STEEL, Defendant-Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
K. J. Wolff, New York City, for plaintiff-appellant.
Before EAGER, J.P., and CAPOZZOLI, McGIVERN, McNALLY and STEUER, JJ.
Order entered December 11, 1968, unanimously reversed on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion for summary judgment in the sum of $15,817.30 plus interest is granted.
The unconditional guarantee is an instrument for the payment of money only within the meaning of CPLR 3213. (Seaman-Andwall Corp. v. Wright Machine Corp., 31 A.D.2d 136, 295 N.Y.S.2d 752.) The defenses sought to be asserted are insufficient as a matter of law. The defense of economic duress is without factual basis. The defense based on defects in the merchandise sold to the principal debtor is not available to the respondent-guarantor. (Elliott v. Brady, 192 N.Y. 221, 85 N.E. 69, 18 L.R.A., N.S., 600.) The documentary evidence establishes the amount of defendant's indebtedness, as well as defendant-respondent's liability therefor.
Settle order on notice.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Barclays Bank of New York v. Goldman
...five loans. See Chase Manhattan Bank N.A. v. Marcovitz, 56 A.D.2d 763, 392 N.Y.S.2d 435 (1st Dep't 1977); Rhodia, Inc. v. Steel, 32 A.D.2d 753, 300 N.Y.S.2d 1005 (1st Dep't 1969). The Goldmans' argument, not surprisingly, is more complex, although essentially they claim that genuine issues ......
-
Torin Assocs., Inc. v. Perez
...on "the absolute and unconditional guaranty" that was "executed by [defendant] and an affidavit of nonpayment"); Rhodia, Inc. v. Steel, 32 A.D.2d 753, 753 (1st Dep't 1969) (unconditional guarantee of a promissory note). "To come within the section the instrument need not be a negotiable ins......
-
Interman Indus. Products, Ltd. v. R.S.M. Electron Power, Inc.
...136, 295 N.Y.S.2d 752, affd. 29 N.Y.2d 617, 324 N.Y.S.2d 410, 273 N.E.2d 138 (promissory note not in dispute); Rhodia, Inc. v. Steel, 32 A.D.2d 753, 300 N.Y.S.2d 1005 (unconditional guarantee of a promissory note); see, also, the following cases all of which had to do with promissory notes ......
-
Hudson Valley Bank, N.A. v. Mehl
...failed to show that there are any triable issues of fact going to the enforceability of the instruments at issue ( see Rhodia, Inc. v. Steel, 32 A.D.2d 753 [1st Dept 1969]; Executive Fliteways, Inc. v. Caballero, 2007 WL 6714354 [Sup Ct Suffolk County 2007] ). Further, as to the Guaranty, g......