Arjune v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Arjune v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance

137 A.D.3d 1061, 26 N.Y.S.3d 871

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 23, 2016

Docket2015-02304

StatusPublished

This text of 137 A.D.3d 1061 (Arjune v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Arjune v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance, 137 A.D.3d 1061, 26 N.Y.S.3d 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligent misrepresentation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Brathwaite Nelson, J.), entered February 6, 2015, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant submitted evidence establishing its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition thereto, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]).

Chambers, J.P., Austin, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for negligent misrepresentation, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Brathwaite Nelson, J.), entered February 6, 2015, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendant submitted evidence establishing its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition thereto, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]).

Chambers, J.P., Austin, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

137 A.D.3d 1061, 26 N.Y.S.3d 871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arjune-v-commonwealth-land-title-insurance-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack