Case Name: Mimosa Equities Corp., Respondent, v. ACJ Associates LLC et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-01-14
Citations: 135 A.D.3d 529
Docket Number: 
Parties: Mimosa Equities Corp., Respondent, v ACJ Associates LLC et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 135
Pages: 529–530

Head Matter:
Mimosa Equities Corp., Respondent, v ACJ Associates LLC et al., Appellants.
[22 NYS3d 841]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ellen M. Coin, J.), entered December 9, 2014, which denied defendants ACJ Associates LLC and Jadam Equities LLC's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The documentary evidence upon which defendants moved to dismiss the complaint is a letter agreement executed by plaintiff and defendant ACJ Associates LLC confirming plaintiff's satisfaction of a wraparound mortgage and note held by ACJ, in which the signatories released each other from all claims "with respect to only or arising from only the Loan and/or Wraparound Mortgage." Defendant Jadam Equities LLC, ACJ's escrow agent, is holding monies deposited by plaintiff for the payment of real estate taxes by AC J, pursuant to a rider to the wraparound mortgage. Although the rider is incorporated by reference in the mortgage, the limiting language of the release makes it clear that the parties did not intend the release to cover escrowed monies for real estate taxes (see Morales v Solomon Mgt. Co., LLC, 38 AD3d 381 [1st Dept 2007]). Thus, the documentary evidence does not conclusively establish a defense to plaintiff's claim that it is entitled to a refund of the escrowed monies (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 88 [1994]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.