Sterling Nat'l Bank v. American Elite Props. Inc.

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Writing for the CourtTOM
Citation2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 00649,91 A.D.3d 581,937 N.Y.S.2d 221
Decision Date31 January 2012
PartiesSTERLING NATIONAL BANK, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. AMERICAN ELITE PROPERTIES INC., etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants, Rotot Realty, Inc., et al., Defendants.

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 00649
91 A.D.3d 581
937 N.Y.S.2d 221

STERLING NATIONAL BANK, Plaintiff–Respondent,
v.
AMERICAN ELITE PROPERTIES INC., etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants, Rotot Realty, Inc., et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Jan. 31, 2012.


[937 N.Y.S.2d 222]

Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP, New York (David J. Katz of counsel), for appellants.

Platzer, Swergold, Karlin, Levine, Goldberg & Jaslow, LLP, New York (Steven D. Karlin of counsel), for respondent.

TOM, J.P., SWEENY, DeGRASSE, ABDUS–SALAAM, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), entered June 20, 2011, in an action to recover the balance due under an equipment finance lease, awarding plaintiff the total amount of $101,463.77, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered February 18, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and denied defendants-appellants' cross motion for leave to serve an amended answer and for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from the aforesaid order unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying that portion of the cross motion seeking leave to serve an amended answer, as the proposed amendment to add the affirmative defense of release lacked merit. The release upon which the amended pleading was premised did not pertain to the equipment at issue ( see CPLR 3025[b]; 360 W. 11th LLC v. ACG Credit Co. II, LLC, 90 A.D.3d 552, 935 N.Y.S.2d 289 [2011]; Nab–Tern Constructors v. City of New York, 123 A.D.2d 571, 572–573, 507 N.Y.S.2d 146 [1986]; compare Anoun v. City of New York, 85 A.D.3d 694, 695, 926 N.Y.S.2d 98 [2011] ).

The general release explicitly references lease schedule number 728–177–101 and only applies to claims preceding the release. The equipment at issue in this action is the equipment pertaining to lease schedule number 728–177–105, which is entirely distinct. Moreover, the lease schedule at issue here was not executed until a year after the general release was executed. Accordingly, the release cannot, by its own terms, apply to the equipment at issue.

We have considered appellants' remaining...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • FTBK Investor II LLC v. Genesis Holding LLC, 810163/2011
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 19 Agosto 2014
    ...v. City of New York, 203 A.D.2d 147, 148, 610 N.Y.S.2d 249 (1st Dep't 1994). See Sterling Natl. Bank v. American Elite Props. Inc., 91 A.D.3d 581, 937 N.Y.S.2d 221 (1st Dep't 2012). Genesis Holding bears the burden to demonstrate the merits of the proposed defenses through admissible eviden......
  • Glynos v. Dorizas, Index No. 113984/2011
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 6 Marzo 2015
    ...Dep't 1997); Norwood v. City of New York, 203 A.D.2d 147, 148 (1st Dep't 1994). See Sterling Natl. Bank v. American Elite Props. Inc., 91 A.D.3d 581, 581 (1st Dep't 2012). Defendant bears the burden to demonstrate the merits of the proposed Page 2 defenses through admissible evidence. See A......
  •  SP 141 E 33 LLC v. New York State Div. of Housing & Cmty. Renewal
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 31 Enero 2012
    ...School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 [1974]; [937 N.Y.S.2d 221] Matter of 370 Manhattan Ave. Co., L.L.C. v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 11 A.D.3d 370, 372, 783 N.Y.S.2d 38 [2004]......
3 cases
  • FTBK Investor II LLC v. Genesis Holding LLC, 810163/2011
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 19 Agosto 2014
    ...v. City of New York, 203 A.D.2d 147, 148, 610 N.Y.S.2d 249 (1st Dep't 1994). See Sterling Natl. Bank v. American Elite Props. Inc., 91 A.D.3d 581, 937 N.Y.S.2d 221 (1st Dep't 2012). Genesis Holding bears the burden to demonstrate the merits of the proposed defenses through admissible eviden......
  • Glynos v. Dorizas, Index No. 113984/2011
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 6 Marzo 2015
    ...Dep't 1997); Norwood v. City of New York, 203 A.D.2d 147, 148 (1st Dep't 1994). See Sterling Natl. Bank v. American Elite Props. Inc., 91 A.D.3d 581, 581 (1st Dep't 2012). Defendant bears the burden to demonstrate the merits of the proposed Page 2 defenses through admissible evidence. See A......
  •  SP 141 E 33 LLC v. New York State Div. of Housing & Cmty. Renewal
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • 31 Enero 2012
    ...School Dist. No. 1 of Towns of Scarsdale & Mamaroneck, Westchester County, 34 N.Y.2d 222, 231, 356 N.Y.S.2d 833, 313 N.E.2d 321 [1974]; [937 N.Y.S.2d 221] Matter of 370 Manhattan Ave. Co., L.L.C. v. New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal, 11 A.D.3d 370, 372, 783 N.Y.S.2d 38 [2004]......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT