Coleman & Associates Enterprises, Inc. v. Verizon Corporate Services Group, Inc.

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered September 13, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs breach of contract and promissory estoppel causes of action, deemed appeal from judgment, same court and Justice, entered November 1, 2013, inter alia, dismissing said causes of action, and, so considered, the judgment is unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Even though plaintiff appealed from the order and not the ensuing final judgment, in the interests of justice, we deem plaintiffs notice of appeal from the order a valid notice of appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5520 [c]; Robertson v Green-stein, 308 AD2d 381 [1st Dept 2003], lv dismissed 2 NY3d 759 [2004]).

The agreements unambiguously provided that the Professional Services Agreement was to be the overarching agreement governing the parties’ relationship; that Statement of Work No. 1 (SOW 1) governed the work at the Norfolk, Virginia call center; and that Statement of Work No. 2 (SOW 2) governed the work at the Tampa, Florida call center. Contrary to plaintiffs contention, nothing in the agreements indicates that the annual labor rate increases provided for in SOW 1 also applied to SOW 2. Given the unambiguous language of the agreements, the motion court properly declined to consider plaintiffs extrinsic evidence (see W.W.W. Assoc. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157 , 163 [1990]).