From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Omansky v. Penning

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 13, 2012
101 A.D.3d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Summary

In Omansky, the Court held that plaintiff lacked standing to bring suit arising out of a leasehold he previously assigned to another party.

Summary of this case from 1046 Madison Ave. Assocs., LLC v. Bern

Opinion

2012-12-13

Lawrence A. OMANSKY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Tjebbo PENNING, Defendant, 160 Chambers Street Owners, Inc., Defendant–Respondent.

Lawrence A. Omansky, New York, appellant pro se. Law Office of Nathaniel B. Smith, New York (Nathaniel B. Smith of counsel), for respondent.



Lawrence A. Omansky, New York, appellant pro se. Law Office of Nathaniel B. Smith, New York (Nathaniel B. Smith of counsel), for respondent.
TOM, J.P., SWEENY, MOSKOWITZ, RENWICK, CLARK, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul G. Feinman, J.), entered on or about April 25, 2011, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff asserts that defendants defamed him by stating, in front of a potential subtenant, that plaintiff had been evicted and had no right to sublet the property, which was owned by defendants and had been leased to plaintiff. The documentary evidence established, however, that, prior to the alleged statements being made, plaintiff had assigned his rights in the leasehold to Nicolena's B and B II, Inc., a corporate entity run by plaintiff. The documentary evidence further showed that Nicolena's had assigned its rights in the leasehold to an unrelated third-party. Thus, it is that third-party, and not plaintiff, who owns the leasehold, and plaintiff lacked capacity to bring a suit arising out of the same ( see Old Clinton Corp. v. 502 Old Country Rd., 5 A.D.3d 363, 364, 773 N.Y.S.2d 410 [2d Dept. 2004] ). Plaintiff could also not be defamed by a statement when the net effect of that statement was, in fact, true ( see Konrad v. Brown, 91 A.D.3d 545, 937 N.Y.S.2d 190 [1st Dept. 2012],lv. denied19 N.Y.3d 804, 2012 WL 1948019 [2012] ).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Omansky v. Penning

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Dec 13, 2012
101 A.D.3d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

In Omansky, the Court held that plaintiff lacked standing to bring suit arising out of a leasehold he previously assigned to another party.

Summary of this case from 1046 Madison Ave. Assocs., LLC v. Bern
Case details for

Omansky v. Penning

Case Details

Full title:Lawrence A. OMANSKY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Tjebbo PENNING, Defendant…

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

Date published: Dec 13, 2012

Citations

101 A.D.3d 514 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 8657
955 N.Y.S.2d 596

Citing Cases

Russian Am. Found., Inc. v. Daily News, L.P.

The first and second causes of action, which allege that the shell firm headline was libelous to Kovalyov,…

O'Brien v. Higginbotham

Thomas H. v. Paul B., 18 N.Y.3d 580, 584 (2012); Saint David's Sch. v. Hume, 101 A.D.3d 582, 583 (1st Dep't…