Cammy v. Rad Oil Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cammy v. Rad Oil Co.

258 A.D.2d 556, 682 N.Y.S.2d 891

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 11, 1999·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraudulent concealment in violation of General Business Law article 11-B, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Dunne, J.), dated October 22, 1997, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action since issues of fact exist. O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, 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 fraudulent concealment in violation of General Business Law article 11-B, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Dunne, J.), dated October 22, 1997, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action since issues of fact exist. O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cammy v. Rad Oil Co., 258 A.D.2d 556, 682 N.Y.S.2d 891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

258 A.D.2d 556 (Cammy v. Rad Oil Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related