Legal Opinion

Rozina v. Casa 74th Development LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 10, 2011PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*509The option agreement did not violate the rule against remote vesting (EPTL 9-1.1 [b]). Although a closing date was not specified in either the option agreement or the offering plan, which was incorporated by reference and made part of the option agreement, the closing was to occur with or after the completion of several contingencies, all of which were to occur by January 2010. Nothing in the option agreement or the offering plan demonstrated an intention that the option be held open beyond the 21-year period in EPTL 9-1.1 (b). It must, therefore, be presumed that the parties intended that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Winegrad v. New York University Medical CenterNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  2. Kaiser-Haidri v. Battery Place Green, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  3. Ford v. WeishausAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
  4. Rozina v. Casa 74th Development LLCNew York Supreme Court · 2010

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Padded Wagon, Inc. v. Associates Commercial Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API