Gotham Partners, L.P. v High Riv. Ltd. Partnership
2006 NYSlipOp 07561
October 19, 2006
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, December 13, 2006


Gotham Partners, L.P., et al., Respondents,
v
High River Limited Partnership, Appellant.

[*1]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Karla Moskowitz, J.), entered September 6, 2005, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs' cross motion for partial summary judgment as to liability, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Section 1.4 of the parties' Unit Purchase Agreement unambiguously provided that plaintiff sellers would be entitled to an additional purchase price upon a subsequent "sale or other transfer" of the sale units by defendant purchaser. The motion court, taking into consideration the reasonable expectations of the contracting parties, as their agreement clearly evinces when read in part or as a whole (see Sutton v East Riv. Sav. Bank, 55 NY2d 550, 555 [1982]), properly construed this broad language to include the subsequent merger transaction pursuant to which defendant received cash in exchange for the sale units (see Paddington Partners v Bouchard, 730 F Supp 1241, 1244 [SD NY 1990]).

We have considered defendant's remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.