Bussi v. Eismann

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bussi v. Eismann

97 A.D.2d 747, 468 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20485

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 97 A.D.2d 747 (Bussi v. Eismann) 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

Bussi v. Eismann, 97 A.D.2d 747, 468 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20485 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages based on an oral employment contract, plaintiff appeals, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the 9th and 10th Judicial Districts dated September 15, 1982, which reversed an order of the District Court of Nassau County (Griffin, J.), entered October 22, 1981, and granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Order modified by granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment except as to the cause of action based on fraud. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and trial granted as to said cause of action. Contrary to the Appellate Term’s finding, plaintiff has sufficiently set forth a cause of action based on fraud (see Jo Ann Homes at Bellmore v Dworetz, 25 NY2d 112; Lanzi v Brooks, 54 AD2d 1057). There are material issues of fact regarding plaintiff’s fraud claim which require a trial. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Gulotta and Brown, 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 based on an oral employment contract, plaintiff appeals, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the 9th and 10th Judicial Districts dated September 15, 1982, which reversed an order of the District Court of Nassau County (Griffin, J.), entered October 22, 1981, and granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Order modified by granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment except as to the cause of action based on fraud. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and trial granted as to said cause of action. Contrary to the Appellate Term’s finding, plaintiff has sufficiently set forth a cause of action based on fraud (see Jo Ann Homes at Bellmore v Dworetz, 25 NY2d 112; Lanzi v Brooks, 54 AD2d 1057). There are material issues of fact regarding plaintiff’s fraud claim which require a trial. Damiani, J. P., Mangano, Gulotta and Brown, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 A.D.2d 747, 468 N.Y.S.2d 583, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20485, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bussi-v-eismann-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack