Opinion
October 3, 2000.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barry Cozier, J.), entered on or about November 9, 1999, which denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and granted defendants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Richard C. Stein, for plaintiffs-appellants.
William J. Davis, for defendants-respondents.
Before: Sullivan, P.J., Rosenberger, Lerner, Andrias, Friedman, JJ.
The action was properly dismissed upon the basis of the clear and unambiguous releases executed by plaintiffs, at least one of which was executed after plaintiffs retained counsel. Defendants' mere threat to breach a contract to pay commissions unless plaintiffs signed the releases did not constitute duress (see, Austin Instrument v. Loral Corp., 29 N.Y.2d 124, 130-131), and their purported knowledge of plaintiffs' alleged financial straits was merely "hard bargaining tactics" (see,Laub Co. v. Domansky, 172 A.D.2d 289).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.