From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Citigifts v. Pechnik

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 18, 1986
67 N.Y.2d 774 (N.Y. 1986)

Opinion

Argued February 10, 1986

Decided March 18, 1986

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Elliott Wilk, J.

Sherwin Grossfield for appellants.

Herbert Rubin, David B. Hamm and Barbara D. Goldberg for respondents.


Order affirmed, with costs. The Appellate Division properly concluded that there was a novation which extinguished the old agreement and relegated plaintiffs to an action for breach of the new agreement (Northville Indus. Corp. v Fort Neck Oil Terms. Corp., 100 A.D.2d 865, 867, affd 64 N.Y.2d 930).

Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER, TITONE and HANCOCK, JR.


Summaries of

Citigifts v. Pechnik

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 18, 1986
67 N.Y.2d 774 (N.Y. 1986)
Case details for

Citigifts v. Pechnik

Case Details

Full title:CITIGIFTS, INC., et al., Appellants, v. SAMUEL J. PECHNIK et al.…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Mar 18, 1986

Citations

67 N.Y.2d 774 (N.Y. 1986)
500 N.Y.S.2d 643
491 N.E.2d 1100

Citing Cases

Berkshire Bank v. Pioneer Bank

In such cases, the superseding agreement is a novation ( seeCitigifts, Inc. v Pechnik , 67 NY2d 774, 775…

Warberg Opportunistic Trading Fund L.P. v. GeoResources, Inc.

That language does not limit the rights and benefits the buyers bargained for by stripping them of claims to…