TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

New York National Bank v. Primalto Development & Construction Co.

New York National Bank v. Primalto Development & Construction Co., Inc., and Amwest Surety Insurance

N.Y. Nat'l Bank v. Primalto Dev. & Constr. Co., 270 A.D.2d 22 (2000)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
March 2, 2000
Citations
270 A.D.2d 22703 N.Y.S.2d 4802000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2210

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry Crispino, J.), entered December 14, 1998, which, insofar as appealed from, denied plaintiff lender’s motion to amend its complaint so as to include a cause of action against defendant surety for tortious interference with contract, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff loaned funds to a general contractor and now alleges that the general contractor, denominated on the subject bond as principal, assigned to plaintiff its right to payment from the project’s owner. The owner’s payment obligations for labor, materials and equipment were secured by the bond. It is alleged that defendant surety told the owner that it had received many claims against the general contractor and warned the owner that unless it placed a freeze on all contract funds it would incur additional liability as obligee on the bond, and that such warning was a tortious interference with the owner’s obligations to the general contractor previously assigned to plaintiff. These allegations lack merit since the purported assignment is unenforceable as an improper diversion of Lien Law article 3-A trust funds (see, Eljam Mason Supply v I. F. Assocs. Corp., 84 AD2d 720 ). Plaintiffs rights as assignee of contract funds owing from the owner to the general contractor can be no greater than those of its assignor, the general contractor, whose right to contract funds, if any, was subject to outstanding trust obligations at the time the surety warned the owner to make no further payments of contract funds (cf., City of New York v Cross Bay Contr. Corp., 93 NY2d 14, 22 ). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Lerner, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

2002: 22003: 12011: 120022026peak 2002 · 2

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
City of N.Y. v. Cross Bay Contracting Corp., 709 N.E.2d 459 (N.Y. 1999) 16
Eljam Mason Supply Inc. v. I. F. Associates Corp., 84 A.D.2d 720 (1981) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list