Doane v. Baron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Doane v. Baron

198 A.D.2d 470, 605 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11108

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

DecidedNovember 29, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 198 A.D.2d 470 (Doane v. Baron) 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

Doane v. Baron, 198 A.D.2d 470, 605 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11108 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for fraud, breach of contract, and breach of warranty, the defendants Steven Baron and Steven Baron, Inc., a/k/a Four Wheels Leasing, appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), entered May 21, 1991, as granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In this action, the plaintiff established his entitlement to relief and the submission by the appellants was insufficient to defeat such entitlement. That submission consisted of only the bare affirmation of the appellants’ attorney, who demonstrated no personal knowledge of the transactions which were the bases of the plaintiff’s various causes of action. Such an affirmation by counsel is without evidentiary value and thus unavailing (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 563; Romano v St. Vincent’s Med. Ctr., 178 AD2d 467, 470).

We have reviewed the appellants’ remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Fiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for fraud, breach of contract, and breach of warranty, the defendants Steven Baron and Steven Baron, Inc., a/k/a Four Wheels Leasing, appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), entered May 21, 1991, as granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In this action, the plaintiff established his entitlement to relief and the submission by the appellants was insufficient to defeat such entitlement. That submission consisted of only the bare affirmation of the appellants’ attorney, who demonstrated no personal knowledge of the transactions which were the bases of the plaintiff’s various causes of action. Such an affirmation by counsel is without evidentiary value and thus unavailing (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 563; Romano v St. Vincent’s Med. Ctr., 178 AD2d 467, 470).

We have reviewed the appellants’ remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit. Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Fiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 470, 605 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11108, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doane-v-baron-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack