From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bristol, Litynski v. Elliott

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County
Feb 25, 1981
107 Misc. 2d 1005 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1981)

Opinion

February 25, 1981

Herzog, Nichols, Engstrom Koplovitz, P.C., for petitioner.

De Graff, Foy, Conway, Holt-Harris Mealey for respondent.


This is a motion by the petitioner for an order directing respondent to furnish the petitioner with a verified statement of entries, pursuant to subdivision 5 of section 76 Lien of the Lien Law.

Petitioner contracted with respondent to perform landscape architectural services on two properties owned by the respondent in the City of Albany, New York, and petitioner claims a balance due on the contract of $1,140.

On September 26, 1980, petitioner served on respondent a demand for a verified statement of entries pursuant to section 76 Lien of the Lien Law. The demand requested the respondent to deliver a verified statement setting forth the entries with respect to the books or records maintained for the Lien Law trust established by law for the improvements performed by petitioner. The respondent has not complied with the demand although granted extensions of time to furnish said information.

Respondent contends that as a result of breaches of contract by the petitioner, there is no balance due under the said contract. Respondent further contends that there are no trust funds within the meaning of article 3-A of the Lien Law respecting the particular contract, inasmuch as respondent is the owner of the premises involved and the funds to pay the consideration expressed in the contract are his own and are not funds originating from any of the sources described in subdivision 5 of section 70 Lien of the Lien Law and therefore said section does not apply to this contract.

This court agrees with the contention of the respondent that there is no trust created by the instant contract and that there are no assets of a trust of which respondent is a trustee. Subdivision 5 of section 70 Lien of the Lien Law does not apply, and the petitioner's motion is therefore denied.


Summaries of

Bristol, Litynski v. Elliott

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County
Feb 25, 1981
107 Misc. 2d 1005 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1981)
Case details for

Bristol, Litynski v. Elliott

Case Details

Full title:BRISTOL, LITYNSKI, WOJCIK, P.C., Doing Business as SARATOGA ASSOCIATES…

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County

Date published: Feb 25, 1981

Citations

107 Misc. 2d 1005 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1981)
436 N.Y.S.2d 190

Citing Cases

Pellic Dev. v. Whitestone Eq. Farmingdale

In the instant case, the $1,100,000 that the appellant contends was a trust asset was actually a capital…

Pellic Development Corp. v. Whitestone Equities Farmingdale Corp.

(See, Caledonia Lbr. Coal Co. v Chilli Hgts. Apts., 70 A.D.2d 766; Frontier Excavating v Sovereign Constr.…