From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Curran v. Estate of Curran

SUPREME COURT OF TH E STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Aug 16, 2011
No. 2010-05967 (N.Y. App. Div. Aug. 16, 2011)

Opinion

2010-05967 Index No. 23507/08

08-16-2011

Helen Curran, appellant, v. Estate of Thomas P. Curran, Sr., respondent, et al., defendants.

Donna Dougherty, Rego Park, N.Y. (Krzysztof Lach and Kerry Jamieson of counsel), for appellant. Adam Richards LLC, New York, N.Y., for respondent.


, J.P.

ARIEL E. BELEN

L. PRISCILLA HALL

SHERI S. ROMAN, JJ.

Donna Dougherty, Rego Park, N.Y. (Krzysztof Lach and Kerry Jamieson of counsel), for appellant.

Adam Richards LLC, New York, N.Y., for respondent.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action, inter alia, for specific performance of the parties' stipulation of settlement, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hart, J.), dated April 8, 2010, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Estate of Thomas P. Curran, Sr., which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion of the defendant Estate of Thomas P. Curran, Sr., which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it is denied.

That branch of the motion of the defendant Estate of Thomas P. Curran, Sr. (hereinafter the defendant), which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it should have been denied. "An agreement to arbitrate is not a defense to an action," and thus, as here, it may not be the basis for a motion to dismiss a complaint based on documentary evidence (Allied Bldg. Inspectors Intl. Union of Operating Engrs., Local Union No. 211, AFL-CIO v Office of Labor Relations of City of N.Y., 45 NY2d 735, 738; see CPLR 3211[a][1]; Nachman v Jenelo Corp., 25 AD3d 593; Nastasi v Nastasi, 26 AD3d 32, 40-41; Schwartz v Schmergel, 121 AD2d 527).

In light of our determination, the plaintiff's remaining contention is academic.

SKELOS, J.P., BELEN, HALL and ROMAN, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Matthew G. Kiernan

Clerk of the Court


Summaries of

Curran v. Estate of Curran

SUPREME COURT OF TH E STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Aug 16, 2011
No. 2010-05967 (N.Y. App. Div. Aug. 16, 2011)
Case details for

Curran v. Estate of Curran

Case Details

Full title:Helen Curran, appellant, v. Estate of Thomas P. Curran, Sr., respondent…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF TH E STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Date published: Aug 16, 2011

Citations

No. 2010-05967 (N.Y. App. Div. Aug. 16, 2011)