Bank of Suffolk County v. Kite
Cases that cite this one
32 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Mack-Lowe v. Picault-Cadet (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- Morgan Stanley High Yield Securities, Inc. v. Seven Circle Gaming Corp. (District Court, S.D. New York 2003)
- Aaron v. Mattikow (District Court, E.D. New York 2001)
- Crossland Federal Savings Bank Ex Rel. Federal Deposit Insurance v. A. Suna & Co. (District Court, E.D. New York 1996)
- Bank Leumi Trust Co. of New York v. Wulkan (District Court, S.D. New York 1990)
- Intercontinental Monetary Corp. v. Performance Guarantees, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1989)
- Marion Coal Co. v. Marc Rich & Co. International, Ltd. (District Court, S.D. New York 1982)
- Torres v. D'Alesso (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
- Niskayuna Square, LLC v. 81 & 3 of Watertown, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- Flacke v. Salem Hills Sewage Disposal Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)
- Midtown Mkt. Mo. City, Tx. LLC v. Tavakoli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- James Alexander Mason, Jr. (United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina 2020)
- Prince v. Schacher (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Mishal v. Fiduciary Holdings, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Mishal v. Fiduciary Holdings, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- Petra CRE CDO 2007-1, Ltd. v. 160 Jamaica Owners, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
- Tambe Electric, Inc. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- Quest Commercial, LLC v. Rovner (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
- Malsin v. Stockman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- Charter Realty & Development Corp. v. Rotterdam Mall Associates, L.P. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- Chemical Bank v. Allen (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1996)
- Banque Nationale de Paris v. 1567 Broadway Ownership Associates (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- ICC Bridgeport Limited Partnership v. Primrose Development Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- Bank v. Lockwood Venture Housing, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1995)
- Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corp. v. Communications Transmission, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1993)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
It is trué that parol evidence may be admissible to prove a condition precedent to the legal effectiveness of a written agreement if the condition is not contradictory or at variance with its express terms (Hicks v Bush, 10 NY2d 488, 491; see Long Is. Trust Co. v International Inst, for Packaging Educ., 38 NY2d 493, 496-497). But that rule is inapplicable on the facts here. The allegedly unexpressed condition to the promissory note — that defendants, despite their having signed as makers of the note, were not to be held personally liable — was clearly inconsistent with not only the unqualified form of this negotiable instrument, but with its explicit waiver of "the right to interpose any defense, set-off or counterclaim whatsoever” as well (see Fleck v Bank of Suffolk County, 67 AD2d 676, 677; Meadow Brook Nat. Bank v. Bzura, 20 AD2d 287, 290). Defendants’ averments that there existed an oral understanding that they would not be liable on the note did not therefore stand in the way of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.