From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Teitelbaum v. Mordowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 10, 1998
248 A.D.2d 161 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

March 10, 1998

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


The three writings on which plaintiff relies clearly constitute a continuing obligation by defendant personally to guarantee repayment of plaintiff's $220,000 loan given to certain real estate projects with which defendant was associated. All three writings recite the same $220,000 loan, and do not lack consideration simply because they were not executed contemporaneously with the loan. Consideration for a guarantee can be past or executed, where, as here, the guarantee recites in writing that it is being given in exchange for a loan and there is no question that the proceeds of the loan were received (General Obligations Law § 5-1105; Liberty Natl. Bank v. Gross, 201 A.D.2d 467; North Fork Bank Trust Co. v. Jay-Ann Assocs., 192 A.D.2d 590, lv dismissed 82 N.Y.2d 705).

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Williams and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Teitelbaum v. Mordowitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 10, 1998
248 A.D.2d 161 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Teitelbaum v. Mordowitz

Case Details

Full title:JENNY TEITELBAUM, Respondent, v. ABRAHAM M. MORDOWITZ, Appellant, et al.…

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

Date published: Mar 10, 1998

Citations

248 A.D.2d 161 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
669 N.Y.S.2d 811

Citing Cases

Norman Realty & Constr. Corp. v. 151 E. 170th Lender LLC

Specifically, LM contends that because the guaranty was executed days after the restated note and…

Norman Realty & Constr. Corp. v. 151 E. 170th Lender LLC

Specifically, LM contends that because the guaranty was executed days after the restated note and…