RPAPL § 1301 Does Not Prohibit a Plaintiff from Simultaneously Suing to Foreclose on a Mortgage and Enforce a Guaranty on a Note in the Same Action

RPAPL § 1301 Does Not Prohibit a Plaintiff from Simultaneously Suing to Foreclose on a Mortgage and Enforce a Guaranty on a Note in the Same Action

On August 11, 2022, Justice Knipel of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Sharestates Invs., LLC v. 280 Linden LLC, 2022 NY Slip Op. 32780(U), holding that it did not violate RPAPL § 1301 by simultaneously suing to foreclose on a mortgage and enforce a guaranty on a note . . . Continue reading RPAPL § 1301 Does Not Prohibit a Plaintiff from Simultaneously Suing to Foreclose on a Mortgage and Enforce a Guaranty on a Note in the Same Action

Court Grants Summary Judgment of Conversion Based on Defendant’s Failure to Pass On Settlement Payment

Court Grants Summary Judgment of Conversion Based on Defendant’s Failure to Pass On Settlement Payment

On August 10, 2022, Justice Chan of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Grocery Delivery E-Servs., Inc. v. Flynn, 2022 NY Slip Op. 32700(U), granting summary judgment on a conversion claim based on the defendant’s failure to pass on a settlement payment it had received . . . Continue reading Court Grants Summary Judgment of Conversion Based on Defendant’s Failure to Pass On Settlement Payment

Defendant Who Used Address on Guaranty Estopped From Denying That He Resided at that Address in Action to Recover on Guaranty

Defendant Who Used Address on Guaranty Estopped From Denying That He Resided at that Address in Action to Recover on Guaranty

On August 17, 2022, the Second Department issued a decision in Hudson Val. Bank, N.A. v. Eagle Trading, 2022 NY Slip Op. 04956, holding that a defendant who used an address on a guaranty was estopped from denying that he resided at that address in an action to enforce the guaranty . . . Continue reading Defendant Who Used Address on Guaranty Estopped From Denying That He Resided at that Address in Action to Recover on Guaranty

Fraudulent Inducement Claim Fails Where Alleged Misrepresentations Were Contradicted by Agreement’s Terms

Fraudulent Inducement Claim Fails Where Alleged Misrepresentations Were Contradicted by Agreement’s Terms

On August 4, 2022, Justice Borrok of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in W Mgt. Servs. Ltd. v. Fanning, 2022 NY Slip Op. 32637(U), dismissing a fraudulent inducement defense on summary judgment where the alleged misrepresentation was contradicted by the terms of the parties’ agreement . . . Continue reading Fraudulent Inducement Claim Fails Where Alleged Misrepresentations Were Contradicted by Agreement’s Terms