Dual Degree Service Corp. v. Citibank, N.A.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dual Degree Service Corp. v. Citibank, N.A.

300 A.D.2d 434, 751 N.Y.S.2d 419

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

DecidedDecember 16, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 300 A.D.2d 434 (Dual Degree Service Corp. v. Citibank, N.A.) 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

Dual Degree Service Corp. v. Citibank, N.A., 300 A.D.2d 434, 751 N.Y.S.2d 419 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover interest on certain bank accounts, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the [435]*435Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated December 6, 2001, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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

Pursuant to the terms of their account and customer agreements, the plaintiffs were not entitled to receive interest on their deposits. Consequently, as there is no issue of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see CPLR 3212). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover interest on certain bank accounts, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the [435]*435Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated December 6, 2001, as granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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

Pursuant to the terms of their account and customer agreements, the plaintiffs were not entitled to receive interest on their deposits. Consequently, as there is no issue of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see CPLR 3212). S. Miller, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 434, 751 N.Y.S.2d 419, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dual-degree-service-corp-v-citibank-na-nyappdiv-2002.