Preview:

Palmateer v Cassidy 2007 NY Slip Op 32919(U) September 18, 2007 Supreme Court, Greene County Docket Number: 0006532/0071 Judge: Joseph C. Teresi Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service. Search E-Courts (http://www.nycourts.gov/ecourts) for any additional information on this case. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication.

[* 1 ]

STATE OF NEW YORK SUPREME COURT PAUL A. PALMATEER, Plaintiff, -against~ JOI-IN CASSIDY and CLAIRE CASSIDY, Defendants.

COUNTY OF GREENE

DECISION

AND ORDER

Index No.: 07-0653 RJI No,: 19-07-3176

Supreme Court, Greene County, All Purpose Term, August 24, 2007 Assigned to Justice Joseph C. Teresi

APPEARANCES: JAMES F. KEEFE, ESQ. Attorneyfor the Plaintiff 527 Main Street, PO Box 1136

Cairo, NY 12413
JOI-IN CASSIDY and CLAIRE CASSIDY Defi:!ndant Pro Se 510 Joel Austin Road Purling, NY 12470

TERESI, J,: The Plaintiff moves for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212. This action is one for specific performance of a real estate agreement based on the application of the General Obligations Law, Statute of Frauds. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs judgment is denied. A December 30th agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendants refers to the sale of the Defendants' property at 890 Bogart Road in Palenville, New York. The Plaintiff alleges that motion for summary

[* 2 ]

the agreement signed by both parties represents the Defendants' promise to sell the previously mentioned property to the Plaintiff, and that the statute of frauds requires the Defendants to adhere to the written agreement. The Defendants contend that the written agreement was made not as a promise to sell the property to the Plaintiff, but rather was made as a promise to give the Plaintiff first bid on the property once the Defendants were ready to sell the property many months later. The Defendants claim that when the Plaintiff got news of the Defendants' intentions to sell their property in Palenville, New York, he incessantly asked the Defendants if he could buy it trom them. The Defendants allege that they made the written agreement with the Plaintiff to give him first bid on the property when they were ready to sell so that the he would stop bothering them with questions about the upcoming sale. General Obligations Law provides the statute of frauds to enforce any written agreement in the event that one of the parties to the agreement does not perform. Gen. Oblig. Law

Download 2007_32919.pdf

New York Law