Bank of Oman Overseas (USA), Inc. v. Royal Silk, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bank of Oman Overseas (USA), Inc. v. Royal Silk, Ltd.

187 A.D.2d 358, 590 N.Y.S.2d 703, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13047

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

DecidedNovember 17, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 187 A.D.2d 358 (Bank of Oman Overseas (USA), Inc. v. Royal Silk, Ltd.) 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

Bank of Oman Overseas (USA), Inc. v. Royal Silk, Ltd., 187 A.D.2d 358, 590 N.Y.S.2d 703, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13047 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly S. Cohen, J.), entered June 25, 1991, which inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and awarded plaintiff $157,136.94, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The court properly granted plaintiff summary judgment in this action brought to recover, inter alia, on defendant-appellant’s personal guaranty. Defendant signed the note and letter agreement in 1989 as an officer of the corporate defendant and as guarantor. Since there is a concession that there is no good faith defense to the debt on the part of the corporation, defendant’s bare allegations of deceit are insufficient to defeat [359]*359summary judgment on the guaranty. Defendant acted in two capacities, but his knowledge of the facts was complete throughout the credit transaction. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly S. Cohen, J.), entered June 25, 1991, which inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and awarded plaintiff $157,136.94, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The court properly granted plaintiff summary judgment in this action brought to recover, inter alia, on defendant-appellant’s personal guaranty. Defendant signed the note and letter agreement in 1989 as an officer of the corporate defendant and as guarantor. Since there is a concession that there is no good faith defense to the debt on the part of the corporation, defendant’s bare allegations of deceit are insufficient to defeat [359]*359summary judgment on the guaranty. Defendant acted in two capacities, but his knowledge of the facts was complete throughout the credit transaction. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 A.D.2d 358, 590 N.Y.S.2d 703, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-oman-overseas-usa-inc-v-royal-silk-ltd-nyappdiv-1992.