From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

General Trading Co. v. a D Food Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 21, 2002
738 N.Y.S.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Summary

noting that a “guarantee, which states that it is absolute and unconditional and that the guarantors waive the right to interpose any defenses, effectively waived the defense of ... failure of consideration”

Summary of this case from Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc. v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.)

Opinion

535

March 21, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Friedman, J.), entered on or about January 22, 2001, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

ROBERT FIERMAN, for plaintiff-respondent.

KEVIN J. NASH, for defendants-appellants.

Before: Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rosenberger, Wallach, Marlow, JJ.


The motion court properly found the individual defendants liable on their guarantee. The guarantee, which states that it is absolute and unconditional and that the guarantors waive the right to interpose any defenses, effectively waived the defenses of fraud in the inducement and failure of consideration defendants would now raise (see, e.g.,Citibank, N.A. v. Plapinger, 66 N.Y.2d 90, 92-93; Gannett Co. v. Tesler, 177 A.D.2d 353). Defendants' argument, that summary judgment as to liability should be denied because there are triable issues as to whether the sale of the collateral given as security for the loan guaranteed by them was conducted in a commercially reasonable manner, is unavailing. Whether defendants are liable upon their guarantee is an issue which may be resolved apart from and in advance of any determination as to whether the sale of the collateral was conducted in commercially reasonable fashion, the latter being relevant in the present litigation only to the determination of damages (see, European Am. Bank v. Khan, 175 A.D.2d 704, 708).

We have examined defendants' remaining argument and find it unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

General Trading Co. v. a D Food Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 21, 2002
738 N.Y.S.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

noting that a “guarantee, which states that it is absolute and unconditional and that the guarantors waive the right to interpose any defenses, effectively waived the defense of ... failure of consideration”

Summary of this case from Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc. v. Jpmorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.)
Case details for

General Trading Co. v. a D Food Corp.

Case Details

Full title:GENERAL TRADING CO., INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. A D FOOD CORP., ET…

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

Date published: Mar 21, 2002

Citations

738 N.Y.S.2d 845 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
738 N.Y.S.2d 845

Citing Cases

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Bivona & Cohen, P.C.

In addition, because Bivona's fifth counterclaim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing…

VNB NY CORP. v. M. LICHTENSTEIN LLC

Indeed, the Court of Appeals, in Citibank ( 66 NY2d at 93), expressly found that although the evidence in…