Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Fenwick

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Fenwick

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 23, 2019

Docket2019 NYSlipOp 50818(U)

StatusPublished

This text of Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Fenwick (Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Fenwick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Fenwick, (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

Cavalry SPV I, LLC, as Assignee of Synchrony Bank Formerly Known as GE Capital Retail Bank, Respondent,

against

Ronald Fenwick, Appellant.

Ronald Fenwick, appellant pro se. Schachter Portnoy, LLC, for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Vincent J. Martorana, J.), entered June 4, 2018. The order granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action to recover the sum of $4,027.54 based on an alleged breach of a credit card agreement and upon an account stated, plaintiff moved for summary judgment, which motion defendant opposed. By order entered June 4, 2018, the District Court found that plaintiff had failed to establish an account stated but granted plaintiff summary judgment on its cause of action for breach of a credit card agreement. On appeal, defendant argues that plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case of a breach of a credit card agreement.

We find that plaintiff's evidence in support of its motion for summary judgment was sufficient to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its cause of action for breach of a credit card agreement. The affidavits of plaintiff's employee and that of its [*2]assignor were sufficient to lay a proper foundation for plaintiff's business records, which establish that a $4,027.54 balance was due on defendant's credit card account (see CPLR 4518; Merrill Lynch Bus. Fin. Servs. Inc. v Trataros Constr., Inc., 30 AD3d 336 [2006]; Citibank [SD] N.A. v Jamieson, 32 Misc 3d 139[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51554[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]). Defendant's arguments in opposition were insufficient to raise an issue of fact.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

GARGUILO, J.P., TOLBERT and EMERSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: May 23, 2019

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

Cavalry SPV I, LLC, as Assignee of Synchrony Bank Formerly Known as GE Capital Retail Bank, Respondent,

against

Ronald Fenwick, Appellant.

Ronald Fenwick, appellant pro se. Schachter Portnoy, LLC, for respondent (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Vincent J. Martorana, J.), entered June 4, 2018. The order granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs.

In this action to recover the sum of $4,027.54 based on an alleged breach of a credit card agreement and upon an account stated, plaintiff moved for summary judgment, which motion defendant opposed. By order entered June 4, 2018, the District Court found that plaintiff had failed to establish an account stated but granted plaintiff summary judgment on its cause of action for breach of a credit card agreement. On appeal, defendant argues that plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case of a breach of a credit card agreement.

We find that plaintiff's evidence in support of its motion for summary judgment was sufficient to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its cause of action for breach of a credit card agreement. The affidavits of plaintiff's employee and that of its [*2]assignor were sufficient to lay a proper foundation for plaintiff's business records, which establish that a $4,027.54 balance was due on defendant's credit card account (see CPLR 4518; Merrill Lynch Bus. Fin. Servs. Inc. v Trataros Constr., Inc., 30 AD3d 336 [2006]; Citibank [SD] N.A. v Jamieson, 32 Misc 3d 139[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51554[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2011]). Defendant's arguments in opposition were insufficient to raise an issue of fact.

Accordingly, the order is affirmed.

GARGUILO, J.P., TOLBERT and EMERSON, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: May 23, 2019

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Fenwick, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cavalry-spv-i-llc-v-fenwick-nyappterm-2019.