Federal Deposit Insurance v. Schwartz
This text of 431 N.E.2d 621 (Federal Deposit Insurance v. Schwartz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The judgment appealed from and the order of the Appellate Division brought up for review should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division.
We would only add that the appellant executrix has offered no proof of an evidentiary nature to contradict the evidence submitted by the respondent Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The opposition to respondent’s motion for summary judgment is merely a recitation of bare *704 allegations and speculation as to what discovery might reveal. In view of the detailed documentary support for respondent’s motion for summary judgment, and in light of the failure by the appellant either to advance facts rebutting respondent’s proof or raising triable issues of fact (Indig v Finkelstein, 23 NY2d 728) or to seek a stay pending discovery of the facts that appellant claims are not within her knowledge, summary judgment was properly granted.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Judgment appealed from and order of the Appellate Division brought up for review affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
431 N.E.2d 621, 55 N.Y.2d 702, 447 N.Y.S.2d 136, 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 3262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-deposit-insurance-v-schwartz-ny-1981.