From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Victory M, LLC v. Frederic

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Mar 22, 2017
148 A.D.3d 1086 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)

Opinion

03-22-2017

VICTORY M, LLC, respondent, v. Sandra FREDERIC, appellant.

Lee M. Nigen, Brooklyn, NY (Ellery Ireland of counsel), for appellant. Ginsburg & Misk LLP, Queens Village, NY (Joseph Gillette of counsel), for respondent.


Lee M. Nigen, Brooklyn, NY (Ellery Ireland of counsel), for appellant.

Ginsburg & Misk LLP, Queens Village, NY (Joseph Gillette of counsel), for respondent.

In an action for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, the defendant appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Silber, J.), dated July 7, 2015, which, inter alia, granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint and denied the defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff made a prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the sole cause of action, for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, by demonstrating, inter alia, that it complied with its obligations under the subject contract for the sale of real property, and was ready, willing, and able to close (see Spira v. Acceus, 114 A.D.3d 663, 979 N.Y.S.2d 836 ; Huang v. Shih, 73 A.D.3d 981, 904 N.Y.S.2d 433 ; Backer v. Bouza Falco Co., 28 A.D.3d 503, 814 N.Y.S.2d 188 ; Cheemanlall v. Toolsee, 17 A.D.3d 392, 393, 792 N.Y.S.2d 360 ).

In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The defendant's submissions, which included an affirmation by her counsel who had no personal knowledge of the facts surrounding the execution of the contract and was without evidentiary value, did not raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718 [1980] ).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly, inter alia, granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the complaint and denied the defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

AUSTIN, J.P., MILLER, LaSALLE and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Victory M, LLC v. Frederic

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Mar 22, 2017
148 A.D.3d 1086 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
Case details for

Victory M, LLC v. Frederic

Case Details

Full title:VICTORY M, LLC, respondent, v. Sandra FREDERIC, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 22, 2017

Citations

148 A.D.3d 1086 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)
148 A.D.3d 1086

Citing Cases

Breskin v. Moronto

The defendant appeals from the order dated March 7, 2016. The elements of a cause of action for specific…

Finkelstein v. Lynda

Although the plaintiff and the seller agreed to adjourn the closing date twice, the closing did not occur.…