Sullivan County Wholesalers, Inc. v. Sullivan County Dorms

• Decision Date: 15 September 1977
• Citation: Sullivan County Wholesalers, Inc. v. Sullivan County Dorms, 59 A.D.2d 628, 398 N.Y.S.2d 180 (N.Y. App. Div. 1977)
• Parties: , 22 UCC Rep.Serv. 994 SULLIVAN COUNTY WHOLESALERS, INC., Appellant, v. SULLIVAN COUNTY DORMS et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 180

398 N.Y.S.2d 180

59 A.D.2d 628, 22 UCC Rep.Serv. 994

SULLIVAN COUNTY WHOLESALERS, INC., Appellant, v. SULLIVAN COUNTY DORMS et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

Sept. 15, 1977.

Baum & Shawn, Monticello (Henri Shawn, Monticello, of counsel), for appellant.

Seymour Krieger, Monticello, for respondents Woodridge, N.Y.

Before GREENBLOTT, J. P., and KANE, MAHONEY, MAIN and LARKIN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered May 12, 1976 in Sullivan County, which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint against defendant Martin Biederman.

The sole issue in this case is whether plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on the basis of the appearance of the signature of the individual defendant, without qualification or restriction, on a promissory note made to the order of the plaintiff.

The individual defendant claims that he signed the note only as a representative of the corporate defendant. Although there is no indication that the signature in question was written in a representative capacity, because this is a suit between immediate parties in which the name of the alleged principal, the corporate defendant, appears on the face of the instrument, parol evidence is admissible to establish that the individual defendant signed only as a representative (Barden & Robeson Corp. v. Ferrusi...