| Perpignan v First Franklin Fin. Corp. |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 06828 [87 AD3d 1117] |
| September 27, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| Tony Perpignan, Appellant, v First Franklin Financial Corp., Respondent. |
—[*1]
Bryan Cave, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Suzanne M. Berger and Carolyn K. Brooks Rincon of
counsel), for respondent.
In an action to discharge a note, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lally, J.), dated July 7, 2009, which granted the defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff seeks the discharge of his obligation under a promissory note, on the ground that the note was materially altered after he executed it. However, the plaintiff failed to allege any manner in which the note was materially altered (see UCC 3-407, 3-202; cf. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v Allen, 232 AD2d 80, 85-86 [1997]; NAB Asset Venture III v Stanley Simon Diamonds, Inc., 236 AD2d 291 [1997]; Modern Indus. Bank v Woodman, 263 App Div 1019, 1020 [1942]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Skelos, J.P., Eng, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur.