On February 24, 2022, Justice Ruchelsman of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Jesan Constr. Group LLC v. Medford Ber LLC, 2022 NY Slip Op. 30807(U), holding that the conclusory assertion that the signature on a contract was forged was insufficient to raise a question of fact regarding the signature’s authenticity, explaining:
The defendants have introduced an assignment of contract wherein Jesan assigned its rights and interests in the contract to an entity entitled ABC Select NY Inc. The document is executed by Angelo Giacchi. Mr. Giacchi has submitted an affidavit wherein he asserts that the Assignment of Contract annexed to the Motion by MEDFORD BER and LEVINE does not contain my signature. However, on November 21, 2017, a representative of the plaintiff sent an email which stated “Per your request; please find signed Assignment of Contract” with an attachment of the same assignment of contract presented in the motion.
Furthermore, Mr. Giacchi’s assertion he never signed the document compels the only other reasonable conclusion that can be
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).
drawn, namely that his signature has been forged. This is true because beneath the signature which Mr. Giacchi denies is his are
the printed words “Name: Angelo Giacchi” and beneath that the printed words “Title: Owner”. However, it is well settled that the bare self-serving claim that a document was forged is insufficient to raise any questions of fact. As the Court of Appeals stated in Banco Popular North America v. Victory Taxi Management Inc., 1 NY3d 381, 774 NYS2d 480 [2004] something more than a bald assertion of forgery is required to create an issue of fact contesting the authenticity of a signature. Here, there is an absence of factual assertions supporting a claim of forgery. Of course, where a party presents more than conclusory evidence that the signature is a forgery then questions of fact have been raised and there can be no summary determination of the lawsuit. In this case, other than a bald denial as noted, there is no accompanying support for the contention that the signature of Mr. Giacchi is a forgery. Thus, a party that signs and agrees to a contract is generally presumed to know the contents of the contract and to have assented to its terms.