From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Paulino v. Braun

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 14, 2019
170 A.D.3d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

8706 Index 22499/17E

03-14-2019

Manuel D. PAULINO, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. Menachem BRAUN, Defendant–Appellant.

Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, New York (Iryna S. Krauchanka of counsel), for appellant. Gropper Law Group, PLLC, New York (Joshua Gropper of counsel), for respondent.


Morris Duffy Alonso & Faley, New York (Iryna S. Krauchanka of counsel), for appellant.

Gropper Law Group, PLLC, New York (Joshua Gropper of counsel), for respondent.

Acosta, P.J., Manzanet–Daniels, Kapnick, Kahn, Oing, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mary Ann Brigantti, J.), entered on or about June 13, 2018, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff alleges that he sustained a fractured pelvis as a result of defendant's negligent operation of a boat on the Hudson River. Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that plaintiff accepted $ 6,000 in settlement and release of all claims. In opposition, plaintiff submitted an affidavit stating that a claim specialist for defendant's insurer made him the $ 6,000 offer while he was still recovering from surgery and unable to work, and that, despite his response that it was insufficient, continued to "pressure" him to sign the release until "[f]inally" he "relented." At this posture of the litigation, the evidence of overreaching and unfair circumstances raises an issue of fact as to the validity of the release (see Mangini v. McClurg , 24 N.Y.2d 556, 567, 301 N.Y.S.2d 508, 249 N.E.2d 386 [1969] ; Sacchetti–Virga v. Bonilla , 158 A.D.3d 783, 784, 73 N.Y.S.3d 194 [2d Dept. 2018] ; Powell v. Adler , 128 A.D.3d 1039, 1041, 10 N.Y.S.3d 306 [2d Dept. 2015] ). Both the "nature of the relationship between the parties" that negotiated the release and "the disparity between the consideration received and the fair value" of plaintiff's claim weigh in plaintiff's favor (see Skolnick v. Goldberg , 297 A.D.2d 18, 20, 746 N.Y.S.2d 296 [1st Dept. 2002] ).

Defendant's contention that plaintiff ratified the release is unpreserved and does not present a pure question of law appearing on the face of the record that may be considered for the first time on appeal (see Nadella v. City of New York , 161 A.D.3d 412, 413, 75 N.Y.S.3d 21 [1st Dept. 2018] ).


Summaries of

Paulino v. Braun

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Mar 14, 2019
170 A.D.3d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Paulino v. Braun

Case Details

Full title:Manuel D. Paulino, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Menachem Braun…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Mar 14, 2019

Citations

170 A.D.3d 506 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
96 N.Y.S.3d 181
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 1834

Citing Cases

Rojas v. Family Dollar Stores of N.Y., Inc.

Plaintiffs have been able to set aside releases based on mutual mistake where, even if a plaintiff is aware…

Chadha v. Wahedna

Under the alleged facts, the affirmative defense of the release does not entirely bar plaintiff's action at…