Summary
This New York Appellate Division decision affirms the Supreme Court's grant of summary judgment dismissing a plaintiff's breach of contract claim against a property management company. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant failed to properly manage rent collection for his cooperative apartment, leading to a default under his proprietary lease. The court held that the defendants established there was no written agreement and that the parties' conduct did not manifest an intent to form an implied-in-fact contract. Consequently, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact, warranting dismissal.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a contract implied in fact existed between the plaintiff and Metro sufficient to survive summary judgment.
- Whether the summary judgment granting the defendants' motion to dismiss was proper.
Holdings
- No triable issue of fact existed as to an implied‑in‑fact contract; therefore the breach‑of‑contract claim fails.
- The summary judgment was proper and is affirmed.
Key quotations
“To recover damages for breach of contract, a plaintiff must demonstrate the existence of a contract, the plaintiff's performance pursuant to the contract, the defendant's breach of its contractual obligations, and damages resulting from the breach.”
“For a contract implied in fact, there indeed 'must be proof of a meeting of the minds.'”
Factual background
In 1991 the plaintiff and his wife bought shares in a cooperative apartment and assumed the proprietary lease. They also signed a management agreement with Finkelstein Morgan Agency to collect rent and maintain the apartment. In May 2001 Metro Management Development took over as managing agent. The plaintiff later sued Metro, Powells Cove, and others for breach of contract, asserting that an implied‑in‑fact contract existed based on the prior management agreement and Metro's conduct.
Procedural history
The plaintiff purchased a cooperative apartment and a separate management agreement with Finkelstein Morgan Agency. Metro later took over as managing agent. The plaintiff sued for breach of contract alleging an implied contract with Metro. The Supreme Court, Suffolk County, granted Metro's summary judgment motion. The appellant appealed.