From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shutter v. Hillside Medical Investor Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 26, 1993
192 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

April 26, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burstein, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In the underlying action, the plaintiff Stuart Shutter alleged he sustained personal injuries on April 16, 1981, as a result of exposure to gasoline fumes that emanated from leaks in underground storage tanks located on the premises of a gasoline service station in proximity to his medical office. The appellants are the owners of the subject gas station and the respondent was an assignee of a lease for the subject gas station which expired on March 14, 1979. Prior to the expiration of the lease, the respondent agreed to sell to the appellants certain equipment, including the underground storage tanks located on the subject property. The bill of sale executed by the parties, dated April 20, 1979, stated in relevant part: "After conveyance, Buyer agrees to hold Chevron safe and harmless from any and all liability and expense in connection therewith".

The appellants thereafter executed a general release dated May 11, 1979, which stated, in relevant part: "Notwithstanding the terms hereof, the herein General Release is not intended to and does not cover or affect any obligations or other duties, if any, arising out of the terms of the aforesaid Lease, owned by Releasee to Lessor or Releasor with respect to any damage or injury to the person or property of third-parties occurring prior to March 30, 1979; provided, however, nothing herein contained shall be construed as expanding the duties and obligations of Releasee as set forth in the said Lease".

We find that the parties intended that the bill of sale and the general release be construed as one interrelated agreement, as "they were to effectuate the same purpose and formed a part of the same transaction" (Nau v Vulcan Rail Constr. Co., 286 N.Y. 188, 197; see also, Nassau v Associates 66, 149 A.D.2d 489, 490; Williams v Mobil Oil Corp., 83 A.D.2d 434). Reading the clear and unambiguous language of the general release in the context of the bill of sale (see, W.W.W. Assocs. v Giancontieri, 77 N.Y.2d 157, 163), the agreements manifest an intention that the respondent would be liable for third-party injuries that occurred only prior to March 30, 1979.

The appellants contend that there is a material issue of fact as to whether Shutter was in fact injured as a result of a large gas leak from the underground storage tanks that occurred in 1977. However, as Shutter specifically alleged in his verified amended complaint that he "was caused to inhale gasoline fumes and/or noxious fumes" on or about April 16, 1981, which was after the liability cut-off date, we find that the appellants' claim is without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Shutter v. Hillside Medical Investor Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 26, 1993
192 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Shutter v. Hillside Medical Investor Corp.

Case Details

Full title:STUART SHUTTER et al., Plaintiffs, v. HILLSIDE MEDICAL INVESTOR CORP. et…

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

Date published: Apr 26, 1993

Citations

192 A.D.2d 699 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
597 N.Y.S.2d 114

Citing Cases

Williamson v. Moltech Corp.

The stock option agreement provided, inter alia, that the plaintiff's rights to exercise the options would…

Garfinkle Ltd. P'Ship II v. 1 Mecox Bay Inn

In addition, neither the Construction Contract nor the Land Contract contain a specific time limitation for…