Aimco Chelsea Land, LLC v Joan R. Bassey

Annotate this Case
Aimco Chelsea Land, LLC v Bassey 2006 NY Slip Op 00462 [25 AD3d 631] January 24, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Aimco Chelsea Land, LLC, et al., Appellants,
v
Joan R. Bassey et al., Respondents.

—[*1]In an action, inter alia, to recover the proceeds of an escrow fund, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), dated August 26, 2004, as denied those branches of their motion which were for entry of a judgment pursuant to CPLR 5016 to include an award of an attorney's fee and prejudgment interest.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

On a prior appeal, this Court decided that the plaintiffs were entitled to have granted only that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment seeking release of a $250,000 escrow fund, with accrued interest (see Aimco Chelsea Land v Bassey, 6 AD3d 367 [2004]). No other issues were briefed by the parties therein. As to the merits of the plaintiffs' contentions on this appeal, they fail to demonstrate their entitlement to the relief they sought, in the form of prejudgment interest and an award of an attorney's fee (see CPLR 5001 [a]; Maliner-Colvin v 85-10 34th Ave. Apt. Corp., 284 AD2d 434 [2001]; Oliveri v Carter, 256 AD2d 393, 394 [1998]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied those branches of the appellants' motion which were for entry of a judgment pursuant to CPLR 5016 to include an award of an attorney's fee and prejudgment interest. H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Ritter and Spolzino, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.