Fanek v Dutchess Props., LLC

Annotate this Case
Fanek v Dutchess Props., LLC 2006 NY Slip Op 08913 [34 AD3d 722] November 28, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Lisa Fanek, Appellant,
v
Dutchess Properties, LLC, Respondent.

—[*1]

In an action, inter alia, to compel specific performance of an option to purchase real property, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), dated June 13, 2005, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff commenced this action to compel specific performance of a purchase option in a lease. However, in support of its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant demonstrated, prima facie, both that the lease had been terminated and that the purchase option had not been exercised in accordance with the terms and conditions of the lease (see Raanan v Tom's Triangle, 303 AD2d 668 [2003]; O'Rourke v Carlton, 286 AD2d 427 [2001]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). Thus, the motion was properly granted. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Spolzino and Dillon, 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.