From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Camala Co. v. Inland Credit Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 29, 1990
161 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

May 29, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. Greenfield, J.).


We add only that assuming, arguendo, the parties' 1978 participation agreement was ambiguous with respect to the payment of interest as opposed to reduction of principal, such ambiguity by itself was inadequate to defeat summary judgment. Rather, plaintiff was required to come forward with particular extrinsic evidence supporting its interpretation. (Mallad Constr. Corp. v County Fed. Sav. Loan Assn., 32 N.Y.2d 285, 290; Sutton v. East Riv. Sav. Bank, 55 N.Y.2d 550, 554.) This plaintiff failed to do. Nor are plaintiff's self-generated protests about defendant Plantsville's acts and calculations, made only after the relevant agreements were executed, and abandoned three years before plaintiff commenced this action, sufficient to create any factual issues regarding its interpretation of the agreements.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ross, Kassal, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.


Summaries of

Camala Co. v. Inland Credit Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 29, 1990
161 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Camala Co. v. Inland Credit Corporation

Case Details

Full title:CAMALA CO., Appellant, v. INLAND CREDIT CORPORATION et al., Respondents

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 29, 1990

Citations

161 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

Terio v. Terio

We find no merit to the defendant's contention that the Supreme Court improperly denied his motion to set…