Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund v. Wojciech Perkowski, Inc.
This text of 291 A.D.2d 219 (Commissioners of the State Insurance Fund v. Wojciech Perkowski, Inc.) 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.
Opinion
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Martin Schoenfeld, J.), entered October 24, 2001, which denied defendant-appellant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs fourth cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3016 (b); 3211 (a) (7) and 3212, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Based on the allegations in the complaint, which must be taken as true on a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action (see, Cron v Hargro Fabrics, 91 NY2d 362, 366), and the affidavits properly submitted by plaintiff in opposition to the motion to dismiss (see, Mulder v Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette, 208 AD2d 301, 307), plaintiffs fourth cause of action sufficiently states the elements of the claim and clearly informs defendant-appellant of the circumstances constituting the alleged fraud (see, Lanzi v Brooks, 43 NY2d 778, 780). The evidentiary matter submitted by plaintiff was also sufficient to raise triable issues of fact precluding a grant of summary judgment to defendant-appellant. Concur — Williams, J.P., Andrias, Rosenberger and Buckley, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
291 A.D.2d 219, 737 N.Y.S.2d 280, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioners-of-the-state-insurance-fund-v-wojciech-perkowski-inc-nyappdiv-2002.