From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mathias Carr, Inc. v. Mangini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 14, 2004
13 A.D.3d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

4918, 4918A.

December 14, 2004.

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard F. Braun, J.), entered on or about January 25, 2004, which, inter alia, dismissed the complaint as against defendants Mangini and Pricomm, Inc., unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Buckley, P.J., Andrias, Sullivan, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.


The action was properly dismissed as against Mangini since plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that said defendant made payments within six years of the commencement of the action (CPLR 213). The action was properly dismissed as against Pricomm, Essential's alleged successor and plaintiffs' tenant and business associate, in the absence of a writing showing that Pricomm had agreed with plaintiffs to assume Essential's debt on the notes ( see General Obligations Law § 5-701 [a] [2]), or that the payments that Pricomm made to plaintiffs were unequivocally referable to any such agreement ( see Rosenheck v. Calcam Assoc., 233 AD2d 553, 554).


Summaries of

Mathias Carr, Inc. v. Mangini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 14, 2004
13 A.D.3d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Mathias Carr, Inc. v. Mangini

Case Details

Full title:MATHIAS CARR, INC., et al., Appellants, v. JOSEPH MANGINI et al.…

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

Date published: Dec 14, 2004

Citations

13 A.D.3d 148 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
787 N.Y.S.2d 229

Citing Cases

Renaissance Corp. v. E. Vil. Pet Grooming Salon

The text of the obligation undertaken nowhere identifies her as a guarantor or co-obligor with the corporate…

Suifehne Yongtai Econ. & Trade Co. v. Unicos Enter., Inc.

If explicit terms that he promised to pay its debt are lacking, the ambiguity raises a serious question…