CIT Group/Factoring Manufacturers Hanover, Inc. v. Supermarkets General Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

CIT Group/Factoring Manufacturers Hanover, Inc. v. Supermarkets General Corp.

172 A.D.2d 278, 568 N.Y.S.2d 694, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4547

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

DecidedApril 11, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 278 (CIT Group/Factoring Manufacturers Hanover, Inc. v. Supermarkets General Corp.) 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

CIT Group/Factoring Manufacturers Hanover, Inc. v. Supermarkets General Corp., 172 A.D.2d 278, 568 N.Y.S.2d 694, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4547 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Greenfield, J.), entered on March 15, 1990, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 (e), and judgment of the same Court entered on March 23, 1990, which awarded plaintiff the sum of $62,472.89, inclusive of interest, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff, a factoring firm, brings this action for goods sold and delivered to the defendant, which is alleged to have accepted substantial goods from plaintiff’s assignor. In an answer to an interrogatory propounded by plaintiff, defendant acknowledged a liability to plaintiff’s assignor in the amount of $57,043.66, without qualification or caveat. Defendant’s conclusory and unsupported attempt to explain away this admission is insufficient to sustain its burden in opposing a motion for summary judgment (see, Tobron Off. Furniture Corp. v King World Prods., 161 AD2d 355).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Greenfield, J.), entered on March 15, 1990, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 (e), and judgment of the same Court entered on March 23, 1990, which awarded plaintiff the sum of $62,472.89, inclusive of interest, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff, a factoring firm, brings this action for goods sold and delivered to the defendant, which is alleged to have accepted substantial goods from plaintiff’s assignor. In an answer to an interrogatory propounded by plaintiff, defendant acknowledged a liability to plaintiff’s assignor in the amount of $57,043.66, without qualification or caveat. Defendant’s conclusory and unsupported attempt to explain away this admission is insufficient to sustain its burden in opposing a motion for summary judgment (see, Tobron Off. Furniture Corp. v King World Prods., 161 AD2d 355).

We have considered the defendant’s remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 278, 568 N.Y.S.2d 694, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cit-groupfactoring-manufacturers-hanover-inc-v-supermarkets-general-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack