From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lescht v. Concord Village Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 10, 1999
261 A.D.2d 449 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

May 10, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for summary judgment. The record discloses an issue of fact regarding whether the defendant violated Business Corporation Law § 501 Bus. Corp.(c) by imposing restrictions on the subletting of apartments which may not have been applied equally to shares allocated to apartments it acquired through foreclosure ( see, Wapnick v. Seven Park Ave. Corp., 240 A.D.2d 245). in this regard, we note that the record is devoid of any evidence to substantiate the defendant's claim that it does not sublet the apartments it has acquired through foreclosure, but directly leases them to tenants on its own account.

Bracken, J. P., Santucci, Krausman and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lescht v. Concord Village Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 10, 1999
261 A.D.2d 449 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Lescht v. Concord Village Owners Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ALAN LESCHT, Respondent, v. CONCORD VILLAGE OWNERS CORPORATION, Appellant

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

Date published: May 10, 1999

Citations

261 A.D.2d 449 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
687 N.Y.S.2d 303

Citing Cases

Krakauer v. Stuyvesant Owners

Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Williams, Gonzalez, JJ. Contrary to plaintiff's argument, the inclusion of…