From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yunk Chul Jee v. B.P. Cleaners, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 22, 1995
215 A.D.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

May 22, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.).


Ordered that the order dated May 10, 1993 is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated October 28, 1993 is affirmed; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the trial court properly dismissed the plaintiffs' causes of action for breach of contract since they are based on an oral agreement for the sale of real property which was unenforceable pursuant to the Statute of Frauds (see, Nicolaides v Nicolaides, 173 A.D.2d 448). Moreover, under the facts of this case, and pursuant to CPLR 3212 (f), the plaintiffs' mere suspicion that further discovery will uncover written documentary evidence of said agreement provides no basis for denying the defendants' summary judgment motion as to the first, second, third, fifth, and sixth causes of action (see, American Prescription Plan v American Postal Workers Union AFL-CIO Health Plan, 170 A.D.2d 471, 473).

We have reviewed the parties' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Yunk Chul Jee v. B.P. Cleaners, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 22, 1995
215 A.D.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Yunk Chul Jee v. B.P. Cleaners, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:YUNK CHUL JEE et al., Appellants, v. B.P. CLEANERS, INC., et al.…

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

Date published: May 22, 1995

Citations

215 A.D.2d 651 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
628 N.Y.S.2d 502

Citing Cases

Hashkaot LLC v. Union Senior Citizens' Plaza, Inc.

Plaintiff does not provide a basis to postpone the determination of this motion since plaintiff does not…