Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gcp Capital Group LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Monday Properties Investments

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


February 21, 2012

GCP CAPITAL GROUP LLC, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
MONDAY PROPERTIES INVESTMENTS, LLC, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

GCP Capital Group LLC v Monday Props. Invs., LLC

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on February 21, 2012

Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Freedman, Richter, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy S. Friedman, J.), entered December 9, 2010, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff failed to sustain its burden of showing that the condition precedent in the parties' letter agreement was prevented or rendered impossible by defendants in order to avoid liability to plaintiff (see Creighton v Milbauer, 191 AD2d 162, 165 [1993]; cf. North40RE Realty v Bishop, 2 AD3d 1184 [2003]). On the contrary, the record presented no issue of fact as to whether defendants acted in bad faith to frustrate the parties' agreement. Further, the record presents no issue of fact as to whether defendants frustrated plaintiff's efforts to consummate a transaction. Rather, the record shows that any deal between plaintiff and the party ultimately providing preferred equity financing came about as a result of a third party's efforts in obtaining financing for the transaction at issue, and that plaintiff had no role in that transaction. Moreover the deal that was ultimately struck concerning the ownership of 230 Park Avenue differed substantially from the one that formed the basis of the letter agreement between the parties. Consequently, the IAS court properly granted summary judgment to defendants.

Plaintiff's remaining contentions are either unpreserved or unavailing.

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

ENTERED: FEBRUARY 21, 2012

CLERK

20120221

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.