Mendel v. Henry Phipps Plaza West, Inc.Mendel v. Henry Phipps Plaza West, Inc.
Inasmuch as plaintiffs were not parties to the land disposition agreement, and the agreement contained a provision expressly negating any intent to permit its enforcement by third parties, plaintiffs were without standing to prosecute their causes seeking relief under the agreement (see Nepco Forged Prods., Inc. v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., 99 AD2d 508 [1984]; cf. Concerned Cooper Gramercy Tenants’ Assn. v New York City Educ. Constr. Fund, 13 AD3d 61 [2004]).
We have considered plaintiffs’ remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Marlow, Nardelli and Catterson, JJ.