From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

San-Dar Associates v. Toro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 14, 1995
213 A.D.2d 233 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

March 14, 1995

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

Appeal from the Civil Court, New York County (Louise Gruner Gans, J.).


Defendant's assertion concerning "issue joinder" was first raised upon the motion for reargument before Justice Cahn and is thus not preserved for this Court's review. In any event, were we to review defendant's claim, we would find it meritless. We deem defendant's submitted "response" to be an effective "answer" to the complaint, and therefore issue was effectively joined before partial summary judgment was granted. Further, partial summary judgment was appropriate under the circumstances in light of plaintiff's motion, on notice to defendant, and the affidavits detailing the parties' positions on the legal issues presented to the court (see, O'Hara v. Del Bello, 47 N.Y.2d 363). We also note that although the action was ultimately transferred back to the Civil Court, the motion for summary judgment had already been submitted to the Supreme Court before the transfer order. Accordingly, the Supreme Court retained jurisdiction to rule upon the summary judgment motion (see, CPLR 326 [b]).

Plaintiff never waived its right to collect the rental arrears due from defendant. While plaintiff may have unnecessarily refused to accept the tendered monthly payments from defendant, there is no question that plaintiff has continuously pursued its claim to the rental payments. The IAS Court properly awarded plaintiff rental arrears, an issue previously undecided by any court involved in the parties' dispute.

As defendant was ready and willing to tender the monthly rental payments as they came due, but as plaintiff refused to accept such payments, there was no default under the lease and an award of attorneys' fees in favor of plaintiff is not warranted. Further, we find defendant's tender of payment of rent and landlord's rejection of tender and failure to move before the court to accept such payments without prejudice, warranted denial of an award of interest (Kips Bay Towers Assocs. v. Yuceoglu, 134 A.D.2d 164, 165, lv denied 71 N.Y.2d 806).

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

San-Dar Associates v. Toro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 14, 1995
213 A.D.2d 233 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

San-Dar Associates v. Toro

Case Details

Full title:SAN-DAR ASSOCIATES, Respondent, v. JOSE A. TORO, Appellant

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

Date published: Mar 14, 1995

Citations

213 A.D.2d 233 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
623 N.Y.S.2d 865

Citing Cases

W. 54-7, LLC v. Farber

Each time plaintiff rejected these tenders, stating, "[w]e are unable to accept any payment since there is a…

Shyer v. Zyloware Corp.

In those circumstances, granting prejudgment interest on the amounts unconditionally tendered by Zyloware…