From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wiener v. Spahn

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 3, 2013
110 A.D.3d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-10-3

Edith WIENER, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Laura SPAHN, Defendant, 3900 Greystone Associates, LLC, Defendant–Appellant. Edith Wiener, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Laura Spahn, Defendant, Chaim Schweid, Defendant–Appellant.

McMillan Constabile Maker & Perone, LLP, Larchmont (William Maker Jr. of counsel), for appellants. Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP, New York (Jeffrey M. Eilender of counsel), for respondent.



McMillan Constabile Maker & Perone, LLP, Larchmont (William Maker Jr. of counsel), for appellants. Schlam Stone & Dolan LLP, New York (Jeffrey M. Eilender of counsel), for respondent.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., RENWICK, DeGRASSE, FREEDMAN, FEINMAN, JJ.

Orders, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered July 7, 2011, and November 27, 2012, which, inter alia, set aside defendant Laura Spahn's conveyance of her partnership interest in Absar Realty Company to defendant 3900 Greystone Associates, LLC, and her partnership interest in Absar–Gerard Associates to defendant Chaim Schweid, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While the deeds to the properties reflect title held by certain individual partners of the family partnerships as tenants in common, the abundant circumstantial trial evidence shows that the original partners considered the partnerships to be the true owners of the properties ( see Vick v. Albert, 17 A.D.3d 255, 256–257, 793 N.Y.S.2d 413 [1st Dept.2005] ). Moreover, the property management agreements, of which defendants were well aware, expressly so stated. Nor are defendants bona fide purchasers for value, since they actively ignored evidence that Spahn may have misrepresented both the ownership status of the properties and the nature of her interests therein ( see Fleming–Jackson v. Fleming, 41 A.D.3d 175, 838 N.Y.S.2d 506 [1st Dept.2007] ).

We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Wiener v. Spahn

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 3, 2013
110 A.D.3d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Wiener v. Spahn

Case Details

Full title:Edith WIENER, etc., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Laura SPAHN, Defendant, 3900…

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

Date published: Oct 3, 2013

Citations

110 A.D.3d 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
973 N.Y.S.2d 33
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 6431

Citing Cases

Sokolowski v. Wodkiewicz

Addressing the motion's merits, defendant argues that plaintiffs fail to demonstrate that the Property was a…

Martinez v. Fernandez

(See Cadle Co. v Calcador, 85 AD3d 700, 702 [2d Dept 2011] [plaintiff established ownership interest in…