Faulkner v. 609-611-615 Owner's Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Faulkner v. 609-611-615 Owner's Corp.

49 A.D.3d 596, 852 N.Y.2d 790

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 A.D.3d 596 (Faulkner v. 609-611-615 Owner's Corp.) 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

Faulkner v. 609-611-615 Owner's Corp., 49 A.D.3d 596, 852 N.Y.2d 790 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

[597]*597The defendant 609-611-615 Owner’s Corp. (hereinafter the defendant), a cooperative corporation, established its entitlement to summary judgment by showing that it did not reject the plaintiffs application to purchase an apartment in a cooperative development in violation of Executive Law § 296, based on the plaintiffs sex, race, or marital status. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see McCarthy v St. Francis Hosp., 41 AD3d 794 [2007]; Cesar v Highland Care Ctr., Inc., 37 AD3d 393, 394 [2007]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Lifson, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Garni, JJ., concur.

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

[597]*597The defendant 609-611-615 Owner’s Corp. (hereinafter the defendant), a cooperative corporation, established its entitlement to summary judgment by showing that it did not reject the plaintiffs application to purchase an apartment in a cooperative development in violation of Executive Law § 296, based on the plaintiffs sex, race, or marital status. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see McCarthy v St. Francis Hosp., 41 AD3d 794 [2007]; Cesar v Highland Care Ctr., Inc., 37 AD3d 393, 394 [2007]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Lifson, J.P., Ritter, Florio and Garni, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 596, 852 N.Y.2d 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/faulkner-v-609-611-615-owners-corp-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack