Faliskie v. Pike Home Builders, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Faliskie v. Pike Home Builders, Inc.

25 A.D.2d 920, 270 N.Y.S.2d 399, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4161

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

DecidedMay 20, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 920 (Faliskie v. Pike Home Builders, 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.

Bluebook

Faliskie v. Pike Home Builders, Inc., 25 A.D.2d 920, 270 N.Y.S.2d 399, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4161 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum by the Court. Defendant Megivern appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Otsego County, denying his motion for summary judgment or in the alternative for partial summary judgment. Although not separately stated and numbered, the complaint may be read to allege three separate and distinct causes of action charging appellant and three corporations with the breach of a building contract, faulty workmanship in its performance and the breach of an agreement with respect to the financing of its cost. Plaintiffs’ answering affidavit shows sufficient facts to require a trial of the issues of appellant’s individual liability under and for the breach of the agreements alleged. Order affirmed, with costs.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Memorandum by the Court. Defendant Megivern appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Otsego County, denying his motion for summary judgment or in the alternative for partial summary judgment. Although not separately stated and numbered, the complaint may be read to allege three separate and distinct causes of action charging appellant and three corporations with the breach of a building contract, faulty workmanship in its performance and the breach of an agreement with respect to the financing of its cost. Plaintiffs’ answering affidavit shows sufficient facts to require a trial of the issues of appellant’s individual liability under and for the breach of the agreements alleged. Order affirmed, with costs.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 920, 270 N.Y.S.2d 399, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faliskie-v-pike-home-builders-inc-nyappdiv-1966.