A.O. Textile Inc. v. Sep Plus Inc.
57 A.D.3d 397, 868 N.Y.2d 892
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 23, 2008·Published
Opinion
Plaintiff failed to establish as a matter of law that defendants either agreed with its statement of the balance of the indebtedness or admitted to owing a lesser amount (see Herrick, Feinstein v Stamm, 297 AD2d 477, 478 [2002]). Concur — Friedman, J.E, Sweeny, McGuire, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
A.O. Textile Inc. v. Sep Plus Inc., 57 A.D.3d 397, 868 N.Y.2d 892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).
57 A.D.3d 397 (A.O. Textile Inc. v. Sep Plus Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Herrick, Feinstein LLP v. Stamm
297 A.D.2d 477 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)