Dennis v. Rockaway One Co., LLC

76 Misc. 3d 134(A), 2022 NY Slip Op 50930(U)

• Court: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
• Decided: September 23, 2022
• Docket: 2020-640 Q C
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

Dennis v Rockaway One Co., LLC (2022 NY Slip Op 50930(U)) [*1]

Dennis v Rockaway One Co., LLC

2022 NY Slip Op 50930(U) [76 Misc 3d 134(A)]

Decided on September 23, 2022

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on September 23, 2022

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 2d, 11th and 13th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: : THOMAS P. ALIOTTA, P.J., MICHELLE WESTON, CHEREÉ A. BUGGS, JJ
2020-640 Q C

Iya Dennis, Respondent,

against

Rockaway One Company, LLC, Appellant.

Robert A. Dashow, for appellant. Iya Dennis, respondent pro se (no brief filed).

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Tracy Catapano-Fox, J.), entered November 14, 2019. The order, insofar as appealed from as limited by the brief, denied the branch of defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover the principal sum of $23,850. Defendant counterclaimed to recover the principal sum of $16,656.38. Defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and on its counterclaim. In support of the motion, defendant submitted an affidavit by its litigation manager and an affirmation by its counsel. Defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Civil Court entered November 8, 2019 as denied the branch of defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Contrary to defendant's contention, it failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint since defendant failed to submit an affidavit in support of the motion by a person with requisite knowledge of the facts and the supporting affirmation from its attorney lacked probative value (see Alrof, Inc. v Safeco Natl. Ins. Co.,39 Misc 3d 130[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 50458[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2013]; Sydney Realty, LLC v Desiderio, 17 Misc 3d 137[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 52302[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2007]).

Moreover, we note that the copy of plaintiff's petition in bankruptcy submitted by defendant on the motion is not in admissible form (see United Specialty Ins. v Columbia Cas. Co., 186 AD3d 650 [2020]).

Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., WESTON and BUGGS, JJ., concur.

ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk
Decision Date: September 23, 2022