Bronx, LLC v. Washington Title Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bronx, LLC v. Washington Title Insurance

73 A.D.3d 673, 899 N.Y.S.2d 855

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 4, 2010·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover [674] damages for breach of contract and negligence, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Agate, J.), dated January 30, 2009, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied its cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff incurred no loss or injury resulting from the demolition of the subject building by the City of New York (see Doyle v Siddo, 54 AD3d 988, 989 [2008]; Logan v Barretto, 251 AD2d 552, 552-553 [1998]). In opposition, the plaintiffs speculative and conclusory assertions did not raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2009 NY Slip Op 31696(U).]

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

In an action to recover [674] damages for breach of contract and negligence, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Agate, J.), dated January 30, 2009, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and denied its cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the plaintiff incurred no loss or injury resulting from the demolition of the subject building by the City of New York (see Doyle v Siddo, 54 AD3d 988, 989 [2008]; Logan v Barretto, 251 AD2d 552, 552-553 [1998]). In opposition, the plaintiffs speculative and conclusory assertions did not raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Rivera, J.P., Dillon, Florio and Balkin, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2009 NY Slip Op 31696(U).]

Bronx, LLC v. Washington Title Insurance, 73 A.D.3d 673, 899 N.Y.S.2d 855 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

73 A.D.3d 673 (Bronx, LLC v. Washington Title Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related