Capalongo v. Desch

443 N.E.2d 491, 57 N.Y.2d 972, 457 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3830
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 9, 1982·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The judgment of Supreme Court and the order of the Appellate Division brought up for review should be affirmed, with costs.

It appears that the parties by stipulation and judgment of the Supreme Court entered thereon have discontinued, without prejudice, all aspects of the present action save only with respect to the Appellate Division’s grant of summary judgment to defendants-appellants Desch and May dismissing the first and second causes of action in the amended complaint. That dismissal is described in the opinion at the Appellate Division as addressed to the causes of action “seeking judgment rescinding the conveyance to Desch and directing a conveyance to plaintiffs” (81 AD2d 689, 690-691). The grant of summary judgment, so characterized, should be affirmed for the reasons stated in the memorandum opinion at the Appellate Division.

[975] Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Judgment appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

Capalongo v. Desch, 443 N.E.2d 491, 57 N.Y.2d 972, 457 N.Y.S.2d 243, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3830 (N.Y. 1982).

443 N.E.2d 491 (Capalongo v. Desch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Downstate at Lich Holding Co., Inc. v. Fortis Prop. Group, LLC
2024 NY Slip Op 50376(U) (New York Supreme Court, Albany County, 2024)
Schron v. Troutman Sanders LLP
986 N.E.2d 430 (New York Court of Appeals, 2013)