From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

767 Third Ave. v. Greble Finger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 2004
8 A.D.3d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Summary

holding that the covenant cannot negate an express provision of a contract

Summary of this case from 802 Absecon Boulevard/Absecon, LLC v. Fairview Inv. Fund

Opinion

3868.

Decided June 10, 2004.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter B. Tolub, J.), entered October 3, 2003, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion for a default judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Kucker Bruh, LLP, New York (Abner T. Zelman of counsel), for appellant.

Greble Finger, LLP, New York (Thomas C. Greble of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Lerner, Friedman, Marlow, Sweeny, JJ.


The single motion rule (CPLR 3211[e]) has no application where defendants promptly refiled their dismissal motion after initial denial on procedural grounds for failure to attach a copy of the amended complaint. There was no prejudice to plaintiff, and the matter was ripe for disposition ( see generally Ultramar Energy v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 191 A.D.2d 86). Neither the letter nor the spirit of the single motion rule was violated ( Held v. Kaufman, 91 N.Y.2d 425).

Plaintiff's failure to identify any portion of the lease allegedly breached was fatal to its cause of action for breach of contract. Similarly, plaintiff failed to plead a violation of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and failed to allege any facts regarding defendants' bad faith or unfair dealing. In any event, the covenant of good faith and fair dealing cannot negate defendants' express contractual right to terminate the lease at any time without liability ( Berzin v. W.P. Carey Co., 293 A.D.2d 320).

Plaintiff also failed to plead with specificity the allegations underlying its causes of action for fraudulent misrepresentation and fraudulent inducement (CPLR 3016[b]). The fraud claims allege nothing more than defendants' entry into a contract they purportedly did not intend to honor ( Goldstein v. CIBC World Mkts. Corp., ___ A.D.3d ___, 2004 N.Y. App. Div LEXIS 4752). It is well settled that a cause of action for fraud does not arise where the only fraud alleged merely relates to a party's alleged intent to breach a contractual obligation ( Caniglia v. Chicago Tribune-New York News Syndicate, 204 A.D.2d 233). The fraud causes of action were properly dismissed, as was the cause of action for attorneys' fees.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

767 Third Ave. v. Greble Finger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 10, 2004
8 A.D.3d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

holding that the covenant cannot negate an express provision of a contract

Summary of this case from 802 Absecon Boulevard/Absecon, LLC v. Fairview Inv. Fund

discussing a lease

Summary of this case from Mor v. Imbesi Law P.C.
Case details for

767 Third Ave. v. Greble Finger

Case Details

Full title:767 THIRD AVENUE LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GREBLE FINGER, LLP, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jun 10, 2004

Citations

8 A.D.3d 75 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
778 N.Y.S.2d 157

Citing Cases

802 Absecon Boulevard/Absecon, LLC v. Fairview Inv. Fund

Ibid. (referencing 767 Third Ave. LLC v. Greble & Finger, LLP, 8 A.D.3d 75 (1st Dept. 2004) and Moran v. Erk,…

Berkeley Research Grp., LLC v. Fti Consulting, Inc.

FTI maintains that, as the unambiguous contract gives it the freedom to terminate the arrangement without…