Kadah v. Kadah

195 A.D.3d 1415

145 N.Y.S.3d 494 (Mem)

Laurie KADAH, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.Mayada KADAH, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Hassan Kadah, Deceased, Gina Kadah, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Ronald Kadah, Deceased, Alicia S. Calagiovanni, as Administrator C.T.A. of the Estate of Ann M. Kadah, Deceased, Lamise Kadah Carano, Dianne Kadah, Defendants-Respondents,Andrew Kadah, Defendant-Appellant, et al., Defendants.

268

CA 20-00367

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Entered: June 11, 2021

SCOLARO, FETTER, GRIZANTI, MCGOUGH & KING, SYRACUSE (DOUGLAS J. MAHR OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.

ADAMS LECLAIR LLP, ROCHESTER (JEREMY M. SHER OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MACKENZIE HUGHES, LLP, SYRACUSE (RYAN T. EMERY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT MAYADA KADAH, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF HASSAN KADAH, DECEASED.

COSTELLO, COONEY & FEARON, PLLC, SYRACUSE (ROBERT W. CONNOLLY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT ALICIA S. CALAGIOVANNI, AS ADMINISTRATOR C.T.A. OF THE ESTATE OF ANN M. KADAH, DECEASED.

PRESENT: PERADOTTO, J.P., CARNI, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by denying the motion to the extent that it sought dismissal of the declaratory judgment cause of action and cross claim, reinstating that cause of action and cross claim, and granting judgment in favor of defendant Mayada Kadah, as personal representative of the estate of Hassan Kadah, as follows:

It is ADJUDGED and DECLARED that the estate of Hassan Kadah is the owner of 100% of International Controls & Measurement, Corp. stock,

and as modified the judgment is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief arising from a dispute over the ownership of shares in a business named International Controls & Measurement, Corp., plaintiff Laurie Kadah (Laurie) and defendant Andrew Kadah (Andrew) (collectively, appellants) each appeal from a judgment that, inter alia, granted the motion of defendant Mayada Kadah, as personal representative of the estate of Hassan Kadah (estate), to dismiss Laurie's complaint and Andrew's cross claims pursuant to CPLR 3211. We agree with the estate that, contrary to appellants’ contentions, Supreme Court did not err when, in essence, it gave a final order from a Florida court that previously determined the ownership issue against appellants the same preclusive effect that the order would have in Florida as a matter of full faith and credit (see US Const, art IV, § 1 ; Miller v. Miller , 152 A.D.3d 662, 664-665, 58 N.Y.S.3d 573 [2d Dept. 2017] ; Matter of Bennett , 84 A.D.3d 1365, 1367, 923 N.Y.S.2d 715 [2d Dept. 2011], lv denied 19 N.Y.3d 801, 2012 WL 1500072 [2012] ; see also Allie v. Ionata , 503 So. 2d 1237, 1242 [Fla. 1987] ; Wade v. Clower , 94 Fla. 817, 829, 114 So. 548, 552 [1927] ; In re...