Investment Props. Assoc. v Massoud & Massoud

[*1] Investment Props. Assoc. v Massoud & Massoud 2007 NY Slip Op 51106(U) [15 Misc 3d 143(A)] Decided on May 31, 2007 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on May 31, 2007
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: McKEON, P.J., McCOOE, DAVIS, JJ
570167/07.

Investment Properties Associates, Petitioner-Landlord, -and- Doron Zanani, as assignee of judgment, Nonparty Appellant,

against

Massoud & Massoud, Respondent-Tenant, -and- Lisa Pashkoff and Ahmed Massoud, Nonparty Respondents.

Nonparty appellant Zanani appeals from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered October 17, 2006, which denied his motion to amend a judgment previously entered against respondent Massoud & Massoud.

PER CURIAM

Order (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered October 17, 2006, affirmed, with $10 costs.

The court properly denied appellant's motion to amend the judgment in the underlying nonpayment proceeding to add Lisa Pashkoff and Ahmed Massoud as respondents therein since they were neither named nor served in the proceeding (see Achtziger v Fuji Copian Corp., 299 AD2d 946, 947 [2002]; see also Tally v 885 Real Estate Associates, 11 AD3d 242 [2004]). "This is not a case where a party is misnamed ...; rather it is a case where [appellant] seeks to add or substitute a party [respondent]" (Jordan v Lehigh Construction Group, Inc., 259 AD2d 962 [1999]). Appellant's argument that respondent Massoud & Massoud was not a bona fide partnership, raised for the first time in its reply papers below, is not properly considered (see Ritt v Lenox Hill Hospital, 182 AD2d 560, 562 [1992]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT. [*2]
Decision Date: May 31, 2007