Inner Harbor Phase I L.P. v. Cor Inner Harbor Co. LLC


Inner Harbor Phase I L.P. v Cor Inner Harbor Co. LLC (2022 NY Slip Op 07319) Inner Harbor Phase I L.P. v Cor Inner Harbor Co. LLC 2022 NY Slip Op 07319 Decided on December 23, 2022 Appellate Division, Fourth Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. Decided on December 23, 2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., LINDLEY, CURRAN, WINSLOW, AND BANNISTER, JJ. 723 CA 22-00243 [*1]INNER HARBOR PHASE I L.P., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, vCOR INNER HARBOR COMPANY LLC, COR WEST KIRKPATRICK STREET COMPANY LLC, JEFFREY L. AIELLO, JOSEPH B. GERARDI, STEVEN F. AIELLO, PAUL G. JOYNT, LORI A. AIELLO FAMILY TRUST, LAURIE R. GERARDI FAMILY TRUST, MANNION & COPANI, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, AND ZHIYAO DING, ALSO KNOWN AS DAN DING, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF SIMILARLY SITUATED LIMITED PARTNERS OF INNER HARBOR PHASE I L.P., PROPOSED INTERVENOR-APPELLANT. CULLEN AND DYKMAN LLP, ALBANY (CHRISTOPHER E. BUCKEY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS. KIRWAN LAW FIRM, PC, SYRACUSE (TERRY J. KIRWAN, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PROPOSED INTERVENOR-APPELLANT. LYNN, D'ELIA, TEMES & STANCZYK, SYRACUSE (DAVID C. TEMES OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. Appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Deborah H. Karalunas, J.), entered October 25, 2021. The order, inter alia, denied in part the motion of defendants to dismiss the second through fifth causes of action and denied the cross motion of Zhiyao Ding, also known as Dan Ding, insofar as he sought leave to intervene. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: In this action arising from an alleged breach of a $4,000,000 promissory note owed to plaintiff, defendants appeal from an order that, among other things, denied in part their motion to dismiss certain causes of action pursuant to, inter alia, CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7). Appellant Zhiyao Ding, also known as Dan Ding, appeals, as limited by his brief, from the same order insofar as it denied his cross motion to intervene, filed on behalf of himself and various other proposed intervenors. Supreme Court also denied plaintiff's cross motion seeking, in effect, summary judgment on the first cause of action, which asserted a breach of promissory note cause of action against defendant COR Inner Harbor Company LLC (COR LLC) only. Although plaintiff filed a notice of cross appeal, it does not raise any contentions related thereto, and we therefore deem plaintiff's cross appeal abandoned and dismissed (see 22 NYCRR 1250.10 [a]; Brown v State of New York [appeal No. 2], 144 AD3d 1535, 1537 [4th Dept 2016], affd 31 NY3d 514 [2018]; Lancaster Manor LLC v Comprehensive at Lancaster, LLC, 202 AD3d 1446, 1446 [4th Dept 2022]). Contrary to the various contentions of defendants and Ding, we conclude that the order should be affirmed in all respects. Plaintiff is a limited partnership that loaned $4,000,000 to COR LLC for …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals