From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Urgo v. Patel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 2001
279 A.D.2d 518 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Argued December 4, 2000.

January 16, 2001.

In an action, inter alia, for specific performance of a joint venture agreement, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.), dated January 31, 2000, as denied that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 6514(a) for mandatory cancellation of the notice of pendency filed by the plaintiff.

Robinson Brog Leinwand Greene Genovese Gluck, P.C., New York, N Y (Philip T. Simpson of counsel), for appellants.

Ryan Brennan, LLP, Floral Park, N.Y. (John M. Donnelly of counsel), for respondent.

Before: GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, J.P., WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, HOWARD MILLER, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants' contention, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of their motion which sought mandatory cancellation of the plaintiff's notice of pendency. CPLR 6501 permits a notice of pendency to be filed "in any action * * * in which the judgment demanded would affect the title to, or the possession, use or enjoyment of real property". Since the plaintiff seeks specific performance of a joint venture agreement which would require the defendants to transfer the subject real property to the enterprise, this action falls within the scope of the statute (see, Mitchell Field Realty Corp. v. United Artists Communications, 188 A.D.2d 451; Peterson v. Kelly, 173 A.D.2d 688; Yorktown Floorworld v. Wagon Prods., 170 A.D.2d 823; Flotteron v. Steinberg, 88 A.D.2d 968; cf., Felske v. Bernstein, 173 A.D.2d 677; General Property Corp. v. Diamond, 29 A.D.2d 173).


Summaries of

Urgo v. Patel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 16, 2001
279 A.D.2d 518 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Urgo v. Patel

Case Details

Full title:DONALD J. URGO, D/B/A DONALD J. URGO ASSOCIATES, RESPONDENT, v. SITARAM L…

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

Date published: Jan 16, 2001

Citations

279 A.D.2d 518 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
719 N.Y.S.2d 120

Citing Cases

Yonaty v. Glauber

That conclusion turned on the principle that the corporation itself owns its assets, such as real property,…

RKO Properties, Ltd. v. Boymelgreen

Here, the plaintiff seeks, inter alia, the specific performance of agreements which would result in the…