Bronson v. Hansel

947 N.E.2d 157, 16 N.Y.3d 850
New York Court of Appeals·Decided April 28, 2011·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

In support of his motion for summary judgment, defendant proffered a prima facie case that the action should be barred on the ground of release. In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact that the release should be set aside on the ground of mutual mistake (see Mangini v McClurg, 24 NY2d 556, 563-566 [1969]) or because the settlement was not “fairly and knowingly made” (Farrington v Harlem Sav. Bank, 280 NY 1, 4 [1939]).

[852]*852Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Bronson v. Hansel, 947 N.E.2d 157, 16 N.Y.3d 850 (N.Y. 2011).

947 N.E.2d 157 (Bronson v. Hansel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Putnam v. Kibler
178 N.Y.S.3d 851 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)
HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION v. PRIME, L.L.C.
125 A.D.3d 1307 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)