From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Saljanin v. Vuksanaj

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 25, 2001
284 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Argued May 10, 2001.

June 25, 2001.

In an action to recover on a promissory note, the defendants Vuksan Vuksanaj and VKV Associates appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Barone, J.), entered March 21, 2000, which is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $50,000.

Timothy G. Griffin, Bronxville, N.Y. (Timothy G. Griffin and Michael J. Mascola of counsel), for appellants.

Novick, Edelstein, Lubell, Reisman, Wasserman Leventhal, P.C., Yonkers, N.Y. (Lawrence Schiro of counsel), for respondent.

Before: GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, NANCY E. SMITH, JJ.


ORDERED that the judgment is modified, by deleting the provision thereof awarding the plaintiff the principal sum of $50,000 and substituting therefor a provision awarding the plaintiff the principal sum of $45,000; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the appellants' contentions, this action was not barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations (see, CPLR 213; Scionti v. Reid, 238 A.D.2d 496; Park Assocs. v. Crescent Park Assocs., 159 A.D.2d 460). Although the subject note matured on December 31, 1990, and this action was not commenced until July 24, 1997, a partial payment on the note was made in April 1992, which started the Statute of Limitations running anew (see, Roth v. Michelson, 55 N.Y.2d 278, 281; see also, Brooklyn Bank v. Barnaby, 197 N.Y. 210). Thus, the Supreme Court properly awarded judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

However, at trial, the plaintiff acknowledged that, in view of that partial payment, the amount owed was $45,000. The judgment is modified accordingly.

The appellants' remaining contention is without merit.

GOLDSTEIN, J.P., McGINITY, SCHMIDT and SMITH, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Saljanin v. Vuksanaj

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 25, 2001
284 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Saljanin v. Vuksanaj

Case Details

Full title:PALJO SALJANIN, respondent, v. VUKSAN VUKSANAJ, ET AL., appellants, ET…

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

Date published: Jun 25, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
727 N.Y.S.2d 145

Citing Cases

Wilmington - 5190 Brandywine Parkway, LLC v. Acadia Brandywine Holdings

Bernstein v. Kaplan, 413 N.Y.S.2d 186, 188 (App. Div. 1979); see, e.g., Saljanin v. Vuksanaj, 727 N.Y.S.2d…

Williams v. Lopes

Thus, the circumstances of the purported $90,000 payment are sufficient to raise a question of fact to…