From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chase Lincoln First Bank v. Watson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 8, 1988
139 A.D.2d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

April 8, 1988

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

Present — Doerr, J.P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Lawton, JJ.


Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, and plaintiff's motion granted. Memorandum: Plaintiff, as executor of the estate of Dr. James Sibley Watson, Jr., sued defendant, Dr. Watson's daughter-in-law, to recover the payments due on an installment contract for the sale of a family farm relative to a family farm in Massachusetts which Dr. Watson transferred to defendant in 1978. The contract provided for 10 annual installments of $12,000 each. Plaintiff acknowledged that Dr. Watson forgave the first two installments, but moved for summary judgment to recover the balance due.

Special Term erred in denying plaintiff's motion and granting defendant's cross motion for summary judgment. The contract is valid, unambiguous and enforceable (see, General Obligations Law § 5-1105) and defendant has not established a triable issue of fact that the transfer was intended as a gift (see, Matter of Szabo, 10 N.Y.2d 94, 98). Defendant's explanation that the transaction was made solely for tax purposes is insufficient to overcome the evidence to the contrary offered by the plaintiff (Ehrlich v. American Moninger Greenhouse Mfg. Corp., 26 N.Y.2d 255, 259; see also, Bank of Am. Natl. Trust Sav. Assn. v Gillaizeau, 593 F. Supp. 239, 243, 244, revd on other grounds 766 F.2d 709, 712). Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is granted.


Summaries of

Chase Lincoln First Bank v. Watson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 8, 1988
139 A.D.2d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Chase Lincoln First Bank v. Watson

Case Details

Full title:CHASE LINCOLN FIRST BANK, N.A., as Successor to LINCOLN FIRST BANK, N.A.…

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

Date published: Apr 8, 1988

Citations

139 A.D.2d 903 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Ross v. Ross Metals Corp..

In opposition, Jack Ross failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the disputed monthly payments…

Ross v. Ross Metals Corp.

In opposition, Jack Ross failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the disputed monthly payments…