From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

East Harlem Dev. v. East Harlem Council

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 20, 1990
167 A.D.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

November 20, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Davis, J.).


Plaintiff Lancelot E. Fletcher is not a proper party to any action for specific performance to enforce the terms of a development contract which purportedly requires defendant East Harlem Council for Human Services, Inc. to convey a one-half interest in certain real property to plaintiff East Harlem Development Partnership. While the complaint, which seeks specific performance, may set forth a cause of action on behalf of plaintiff East Harlem Development Partnership, the lis pendens was filed solely in the name of plaintiff Fletcher, and not on behalf of the partnership. As plaintiff Fletcher has no cause of action in his own right, the notice of pendency was properly canceled.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Kupferman, Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.


Summaries of

East Harlem Dev. v. East Harlem Council

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 20, 1990
167 A.D.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

East Harlem Dev. v. East Harlem Council

Case Details

Full title:EAST HARLEM DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP et al., Appellants, v. EAST HARLEM…

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

Date published: Nov 20, 1990

Citations

167 A.D.2d 253 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
561 N.Y.S.2d 753

Citing Cases

Gardner v. Larkin

A specific performance claim is not plausible against a non-party to the contract. See 172 Audubon Corp. v.…