From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brookview Homeowners' Ass'n v. Mark IV Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 26, 1991
178 A.D.2d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

December 26, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Affronti, J.

Present — Doerr, J.P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly concluded that the responsibility of defendant Mark IV Construction Co., Inc. to pay maintenance assessments is limited by section 5.04 of the Declaration Establishing Brookview Homeowners' Association, Inc. to any deficit in plaintiff Association's operating expenses. Supreme Court abused its discretion, however, in granting plaintiff's motion to renew, as plaintiff's motion was predicated upon a legal theory not advanced in its original motion for partial summary judgment or even in its complaint (see, Foley v Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558, 568). Moreover, plaintiff failed to provide an explanation for its failure to produce evidence of a deficiency in its reserves at the time of the original motion (see, Huttner v McDaid, 151 A.D.2d 547).


Summaries of

Brookview Homeowners' Ass'n v. Mark IV Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 26, 1991
178 A.D.2d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Brookview Homeowners' Ass'n v. Mark IV Construction Co.

Case Details

Full title:BROOKVIEW HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellant, v. MARK IV…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Dec 26, 1991

Citations

178 A.D.2d 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
578 N.Y.S.2d 326

Citing Cases

Petty v. Dumont

It is well settled that a motion to renew is not available when it is predicated on legal theories not…