Case Name: Frank A. Amendola et al., Plaintiffs, v. Barbara A. Kendzia, Individually and on Behalf of CCB Associates, a New York General Partnership, Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff-Appellant. Frank A. Amendola et al., Counterclaim Defendants-Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2005-04-29
Citations: 17 A.D.3d 1109
Docket Number: Appeal No. 2
Parties: Frank A. Amendola et al., Plaintiffs, v Barbara A. Kendzia, Individually and on Behalf of CCB Associates, a New York General Partnership, Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff-Appellant. Frank A. Amendola et al., Counterclaim Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 17
Pages: 1109–1109

Head Matter:
Frank A. Amendola et al., Plaintiffs, v Barbara A. Kendzia, Individually and on Behalf of CCB Associates, a New York General Partnership, Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff-Appellant. Frank A. Amendola et al., Counterclaim Defendants-Respondents.
(Appeal No. 2.)
[793 NYS2d 814]

Opinion:
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Niagara County (Richard C. Kloch Sr., A.J.), entered June 3, 2004. The order, among other things, dismissed counterclaims one through six as time-barred and, alternatively, dismissed counterclaims two and six as barred by the statute of frauds.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by denying the motion of counterclaim defendants Frank A. Amendola and Joseph E Bruno and the amended cross motion with respect to counterclaims one through four and reinstating those counterclaims and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.
Same memorandum as in Amendola v Kendzia (17 AD3d 1105 [2005]). Present—Scudder, J.P., Kehoe, Martoche, Smith and Hayes, JJ.