Cherokee Owners Corp. v. DNA Contracting, LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cherokee Owners Corp. v. DNA Contracting, LLC

116 A.D.3d 517, 983 N.Y.S.2d 402

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

DecidedApril 10, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 116 A.D.3d 517 (Cherokee Owners Corp. v. DNA Contracting, LLC) 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

Cherokee Owners Corp. v. DNA Contracting, LLC, 116 A.D.3d 517, 983 N.Y.S.2d 402 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered April 15, 2013, which denied the motion of defend[518]*518ants DNA Contracting, LLC (contractor) and Vigilant Insurance Company for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them and awarding DNA judgment on its counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant movants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the affidavit of an individual with personal knowledge who averred that defendant contractor’s work was in accordance with the contract documents, drawings and specifications and that there were no overcharges. In opposition, plaintiff submitted evidence based on personal knowledge supporting its claim of defects in the work and other claimed breaches of the construction contract, thereby creating issues of fact. Plaintiff’s claim against the contractor is not barred by law of the case (cf. Matter of East 51st St. Crane Collapse Litig., 114 AD3d 611 [1st Dept 2014]). Concur — Friedman, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman, Gische and Clark, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered April 15, 2013, which denied the motion of defend[518]*518ants DNA Contracting, LLC (contractor) and Vigilant Insurance Company for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them and awarding DNA judgment on its counterclaims, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant movants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the affidavit of an individual with personal knowledge who averred that defendant contractor’s work was in accordance with the contract documents, drawings and specifications and that there were no overcharges. In opposition, plaintiff submitted evidence based on personal knowledge supporting its claim of defects in the work and other claimed breaches of the construction contract, thereby creating issues of fact. Plaintiff’s claim against the contractor is not barred by law of the case (cf. Matter of East 51st St. Crane Collapse Litig., 114 AD3d 611 [1st Dept 2014]). Concur — Friedman, J.E, Moskowitz, Freedman, Gische and Clark, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 A.D.3d 517, 983 N.Y.S.2d 402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cherokee-owners-corp-v-dna-contracting-llc-nyappdiv-2014.