Stallone v. Rostek
| Decision Date | 07 March 2006 |
| Docket Number | 2005-04189. |
| Citation | 809 N.Y.S.2d 920,2006 NY Slip Op 01606,27 A.D.3d 449 |
| Parties | RAMONA STALLONE et al., Appellants, v. ADRIANNA ROSTEK et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
"[A] document comes within CPLR 3213 `if a prima facie case would be made out by the instrument and a failure to make the payments called for by its terms' . . . The instrument does not qualify if outside proof is needed, other than simple proof of nonpayment or a similar de minimis deviation from the face of the document" (Weissman v Sinorm Deli, 88 NY2d 437, 444 [1996] [citations omitted]). Here, the Supreme Court correctly denied the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment since "outside proof" requiring disclosure is necessary to determine, among other things, the distribution of the corporation's net profits and accounts receivables (see Eisenberg v HSBC Payment Serv. [USA], 307 AD2d 950 [2003]; Russo v O'Meara, 300 AD2d 563 [2002]).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lawrence v. Kennedy
...supra, 88 N.Y.2d at 444, 646 N.Y.S.2d 308, 669 N.E.2d 242; Ro & Ke, Inc. v. Stevens, 61 A.D.3d 953, 878 N.Y.S.2d 394; Stallone v. Rostek, 27 A.D.3d 449, 809 N.Y.S.2d 920). It has been observed that “disputes which involve only the non-payment of money due under an arguably discrete and sepa......
-
Sun Convenient, Inc. v. Sarasamir Corp.
...N.Y.2d 437, 444, 646 N.Y.S.2d 308, 669 N.E.2d 242 ; Ro & Ke, Inc. v. Stevens, 61 A.D.3d 953, 953, 878 N.Y.S.2d 394 ; Stallone v. Rostek, 27 A.D.3d 449, 450, 809 N.Y.S.2d 920 ). “An instrument does not qualify for accelerated relief under CPLR 3213 ‘if outside proof is needed, other than sim......
-
Engel v. Boymelgreen
...61 A.D.3d 953, 878 N.Y.S.2d 394; Comforce Telecom, Inc. v. Spears Holding Co., Inc., 42 A.D.3d 557, 840 N.Y.S.2d 145; Stallone v. Rostek, 27 A.D.3d 449, 809 N.Y.S.2d 920; Gregorio v. Gregorio, 234 A.D.2d 512, 651 N.Y.S.2d 599). The Supreme Court erred in awarding judgment in favor of the pl......
-
Lawrence v. Kennedy
...deviation from the face of the document” ( id.;see Ro & Ke, Inc. v. Stevens, 61 A.D.3d 953, 953, 878 N.Y.S.2d 394;Stallone v. Rostek, 27 A.D.3d 449, 450, 809 N.Y.S.2d 920). Here, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint. With respect......