Downes v. Aran

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Downes v. Aran

229 A.D.2d 1025, 646 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9139

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 12, 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (see, CPLR 3213) were properly granted. It is undisputed that defendants executed unconditional personal guarantees of payment for loans made by plaintiffs to World Holding, Inc., and that defendants failed to make payment upon the corporation’s default. In opposition to plaintiffs’ motions, defendants failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact requiring a trial on their defense of fraud in the inducement. The fraudulent misrepresentations alleged by defendants were not made by plaintiffs and defendants have produced no evidence that plaintiffs participated in the alleged fraud (see, Key Bank v Ryan, 132 AD2d 220, 223; Sterling Natl. Bank & Trust Co. v I. S. A. Merchandising Corp., 91 AD2d 571, 572; Union Natl. Bank v Schurm, 87 AD2d 682, 683). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Queens County, Milano, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (see, CPLR 3213) were properly granted. It is undisputed that defendants executed unconditional personal guarantees of payment for loans made by plaintiffs to World Holding, Inc., and that defendants failed to make payment upon the corporation’s default. In opposition to plaintiffs’ motions, defendants failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact requiring a trial on their defense of fraud in the inducement. The fraudulent misrepresentations alleged by defendants were not made by plaintiffs and defendants have produced no evidence that plaintiffs participated in the alleged fraud (see, Key Bank v Ryan, 132 AD2d 220, 223; Sterling Natl. Bank & Trust Co. v I. S. A. Merchandising Corp., 91 AD2d 571, 572; Union Natl. Bank v Schurm, 87 AD2d 682, 683). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Queens County, Milano, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Downes v. Aran, 229 A.D.2d 1025, 646 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9139 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

229 A.D.2d 1025 (Downes v. Aran) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related