City Check Cashing, Inc. v. Principi

185 Misc. 2d 201, 712 N.Y.S.2d 736, 2000 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 343

This text of 185 Misc. 2d 201 (City Check Cashing, Inc. v. Principi) 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
City Check Cashing, Inc. v. Principi, 185 Misc. 2d 201, 712 N.Y.S.2d 736, 2000 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 343 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order unanimously reversed without costs and plaintiffs [202]*202motion for summary judgment denied, without prejudice to renewal after completion of discovery proceedings, which proceedings shall be completed within 60 days from the date of the order hereon, or at such other time as may be agreed by the parties in writing.

Plaintiff City Check Cashing, Inc. commenced the instant action to recover on a check drawn on the checking account of defendant Richard Principi, Inc. and signed by defendant Dolores Principi, which check had been dishonored. Defendants asserted the affirmative defenses of breach of contract and fraud in the inducement. The court below granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment finding that plaintiff was a holder in due course and not subject to defendants’ affirmative defenses (UCC 3-302, 3-305). We reverse.

Summary judgment should be denied where the facts essential to oppose the motion are within the movant’s knowledge, which may be disclosed by examination before trial (Jered Contr. Corp. v New York City Tr. Auth., 22 NY2d 187, 195; Terranova v Emil, 20 NY2d 493, 497). Defendants’ affirmative defense of breach of contract may be asserted against a holder (see, UCC 3-306), though not cognizable against a holder in due course (see, UCC 3-305). Inasmuch as the facts and circumstances surrounding the issue of whether plaintiff is a holder in due course are within the knowledge of plaintiff, it was improper to grant summary judgment at this juncture of the proceedings.

DiPaola, P. J., Floyd and Palella, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Terranova v. Emil
231 N.E.2d 753 (New York Court of Appeals, 1967)
Jered Contracting Corp. v. New York City Transit Authority
239 N.E.2d 197 (New York Court of Appeals, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
185 Misc. 2d 201, 712 N.Y.S.2d 736, 2000 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-check-cashing-inc-v-principi-nyappterm-2000.