27 Cited authorities

  1. Greenwich Capital v. Negrin

    74 A.D.3d 413 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)   Cited 56 times
    Recognizing that "a contract should not be interpreted to produce a result that is absurd, commercially unreasonable or contrary to the reasonable expectations of the parties"
  2. Transit Funding Assocs., LLC v. Capital One Equip. Fin. Corp.

    149 A.D.3d 23 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)   Cited 15 times

    02-28-2017 TRANSIT FUNDING ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents–Appellants, v. CAPITAL ONE EQUIPMENT FINANCE CORP., Formerly known as All Points Capital Corp. doing business as Capital One Taxi Medallion Finance, et al., Defendants–Appellants–Respondents. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York (Alexander C. Drylewski, George A. Zimmerman and Patrick G. Rideout of counsel), for appellants-respondents. Molo Lamken LLP, New York (Robert Kry, Steven F. Molo and Michelle J. Parthum

  3. Nugent v. Hubbard

    130 A.D.3d 893 (N.Y. App. Div. 2015)   Cited 11 times

    2015-07-22 Michael T. NUGENT, et al., appellants, v. Joseph C. HUBBARD, et al., defendants, Daniel O'Donnell, et al., respondents (and a third-party action). Peter R. Ginsberg Law, LLC, New York, N.Y. (Christopher R. Deubert of counsel), for appellants. Glass & Glass, Babylon, N.Y. (Gerard J. Glass of counsel), for respondents. PETER B. SKELOS Peter R. Ginsberg Law, LLC, New York, N.Y. (Christopher R. Deubert of counsel), for appellants. Glass & Glass, Babylon, N.Y. (Gerard J. Glass of counsel),

  4. Canterbury Realty v. Sav. Bank

    135 A.D.2d 102 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)   Cited 44 times
    In Canterbury, the New York Appellate Division, Third Department, held that summary judgment was improper on the bank's action to enforce a guaranty because, despite the unconditional language of the guaranty, issues of fact existed as to whether a bank employee had orally modified the terms of the original underlying debt and whether the primary obligor had relied on that modification to its detriment, thus precipitating the default upon which the bank sought to enforce the guaranty.
  5. Merchants Bank of New York v. Gold Lane Corp.

    28 A.D.3d 266 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)   Cited 18 times

    7190. April 13, 2006. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered February 22, 2005, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its cause of action to recover a deficiency judgment against defendant Gold Lane Corp., affirmed, without costs. Zeichner Ellman Krause LLP, New York (Bruce S. Goodman of counsel), for appellant. Leo Fox, New York, for respondents. Before: Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli and Catterson, JJ. Concur. Following

  6. HSBC Bank USA v. IPO, LLC

    290 A.D.2d 246 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 22 times

    5450 January 8, 2002. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered December 13, 2000, which granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint and directed judgment in its favor in the amount of $1,449,802.85 plus interest, costs and fees, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the matter remanded for further proceedings. MALCOLM T. BROWN for PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. JEFFREY L. SOLOMON for DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. Before: Williams

  7. Marine Midland Bank v. CMR Industries, Inc.

    159 A.D.2d 94 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)   Cited 31 times

    July 18, 1990. Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County, John Di Noto, J. Hayt, Hayt Landau (Aaron R. Cahn of counsel), for appellant. Pinks, Brooks, Stern, Rubin Arbeit (Steven G. Pinks of counsel), for respondents. BALLETTA, J. In the instant case, the individual defendants executed guarantees for the payments of loans made to the corporate defendant, which agreements contained language purportedly waiving all rights that they may have had with respect to the collateral securing the loans.

  8. Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Frank L. Marino

    74 A.D.2d 620 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)   Cited 35 times
    Holding negligent failure to liquidate collateral which substantially declines in value is a breach of secured party's duty to use reasonable care in the custody and preservation of collateral
  9. Barclays Bank of New York v. Heady Elec. Co.

    174 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)   Cited 15 times

    June 27, 1991 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Jiudice, J.). Harvey, J. On December 30, 1983, defendant Heady Electric Company, Inc., by its president, defendant Brian T. Heady (hereinafter Heady), executed a secured note in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $150,000. Heady and his wife, defendant Coral A. Heady, also executed a guarantee agreement in conjunction with this transaction. The proceeds of this note and the others that followed were rolled over and eventually consolidated

  10. Weinsten v. Fleet Factors Corp.

    210 A.D.2d 74 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)   Cited 9 times

    December 8, 1994 Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.). Plaintiff guarantors' purported waiver of the defense of commercial reasonableness in their guaranties was ineffective (Marine Midland Bank v CMR Indus., 159 A.D.2d 94, 102-107 [2d Dept]; Marine Midland Bank v Kristin Intl., 141 A.D.2d 259 [4th Dept]; see also, Bank of China v Chan, 937 F.2d 780, 785-786 [2d Cir]; contra, First City Div. of Chase Lincoln First Bank v Vitale, 123 A.D.2d 207 [3d Dept]). Summary judgment

  11. Section 9-504 - Indication of Collateral

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 9-504   Cited 113 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Referencing "method, manner, time, place, and terms"
  12. Section 9-610 - Disposition of Collateral after Default

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 9-610   Cited 100 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a secured party may purchase its collateral at a public disposition
  13. Section 9-611 - Notification Before Disposition of Collateral

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 9-611   Cited 56 times
    Referring to notification before non-judicial disposition of collateral under UCC § 9-610
  14. Section 9-207 - Rights and Duties of Secured Party Having Possession or Control of Collateral

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 9-207   Cited 27 times

    (a) Duty of care when secured party in possession. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d), a secured party shall use reasonable care in the custody and preservation of collateral in the secured party's possession. In the case of chattel paper or an instrument, reasonable care includes taking necessary steps to preserve rights against prior parties unless otherwise agreed. (b) Expenses, risks, duties, and rights when secured party in possession. Except as otherwise provided in subsection (d)

  15. Section 1-302 - Variation by agreement

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 1-302   Cited 6 times

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b) or elsewhere in this act, the effect of provisions of this act may be varied by agreement. (b) The obligations of good faith, diligence, reasonableness, and care prescribed by this act may not be disclaimed by agreement. The parties, by agreement, may determine the standards by which the performance of those obligations is to be measured if those standards are not manifestly unreasonable. Whenever this act requires an action to be taken within a

  16. Section 9-624 - Waiver

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 9-624

    (a) Waiver of disposition notification. A debtor or secondary obligor may waive the right to notification of disposition of collateral under Section 9-611 only by an agreement to that effect entered into and authenticated after default. (b) Waiver of mandatory disposition. A debtor may waive the right to require disposition of collateral under Section 9-620 (e) only by an agreement to that effect entered into and authenticated after default. (c) Waiver of redemption right. Except in a consumer-goods

  17. Section 500.13 - Content and form of briefs in normal course appeals

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.13

    (a) Content. All briefs shall conform to the requirements of section 500.1 of this Part and contain a table of contents, a table of cases and authorities, questions presented, point headings, and, if necessary, a disclosure statement pursuant to section 500.1(f) of this Part. Such disclosure statement shall be included before the table of contents in the party's principal brief. Appellant's brief shall include a statement showing that the court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and to review