From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Girolamo v. Hyman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 28, 2002
292 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

623

March 28, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered December 1, 2000, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Victor A. Worms for plaintiff-appellant.

Aaron D. Maslow for defendant-respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Wallach, Rubin, Marlow, JJ.


This action to recover upon numerous promissory notes was properly dismissed as time-barred. Even if, as plaintiff argues, the acceleration clause applicable to the notes was not self-executing, but required action by plaintiff to become operative, plaintiff's affidavit in support of an earlier motion establishes that he took action to accelerate the notes, and thus triggered the running of the statutory period, more than six years prior to this action's commencement.

In any event, the notes, which are blank as to the payee, are not enforceable as written (see, UCC 3-115; Hilborn v. Pennsylvania Cement Co., 145 A.D. 442, 446).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Girolamo v. Hyman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 28, 2002
292 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Girolamo v. Hyman

Case Details

Full title:JOHN GIROLAMO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. FRED HYMAN, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT

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

Date published: Mar 28, 2002

Citations

292 A.D.2d 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
739 N.Y.S.2d 266