From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Salatino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 6, 1992
180 A.D.2d 434 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

February 6, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Burton S. Sherman, J.).


Denial of the application because not made in good faith was proper (Matter of Crane Co. v. Anaconda Co., 39 N.Y.2d 14). Unrebutted evidence shows that, upon respondent co-op board's rejection of petitioners' proposed sale of their apartment in 1988, petitioner Dr. Salatino brought duplicative law suits, one against the cooperative corporation, and the other against the individual board members, the latter asserting, inter alia, that such individuals harassed petitioner and seeking $3 million for mental distress, and further, that he initiated two criminal complaints against the co-op president and the building superintendent, which the District Attorney saw fit not to prosecute; and verbally abused and harassed the co-op president and the building superintendent. It is also pertinent that in May 1990, petitioner Dr. Salatino received an audited financial statement of the cooperative corporation and that he made his broad demand for inspection of documents in July 1990, immediately after a dispute between the cooperative corporation and its managing agent was publicly aired, affording a pretext for the demand.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Ellerin and Kassal, JJ.

Kupferman, J., concurs in the result only on the ground that the request was too broad.


Summaries of

Matter of Salatino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 6, 1992
180 A.D.2d 434 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Matter of Salatino

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of RALPH SALATINO et al., Appellants. 210 EAST 15TH STREET…

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

Date published: Feb 6, 1992

Citations

180 A.D.2d 434 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
579 N.Y.S.2d 373

Citing Cases

In Matter of Application of Schapira v. Grunberg

Respondents' motives appear questionable, Vasinkevich v. Elm Drugs, 208 AD2d at 524, if not from respondents'…