Federal Financial v. Lauria

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Federal Financial v. Lauria

224 A.D.2d 384, 638 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 893

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

DecidedFebruary 5, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 224 A.D.2d 384 (Federal Financial v. Lauria) 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

Federal Financial v. Lauria, 224 A.D.2d 384, 638 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover on a promissory [385]*385note, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), entered October 27, 1994, which, upon granting the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and against him in the principal sum of $25,876.71, plus attorneys’ fees of $4,025.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment was properly granted (see, CPLR 3212; Ehrlich v American Moninger Greenhouse Mfg. Corp., 26 NY2d 255). The affidavit of the plaintiffs managing partner was sufficient to establish that the defendant did not repay the subject loan.

Moreover, the award of attorneys’ fees, as provided for in the promissory note, was reasonable. Bracken, J. P., Miller, Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover on a promissory [385]*385note, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), entered October 27, 1994, which, upon granting the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and against him in the principal sum of $25,876.71, plus attorneys’ fees of $4,025.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment was properly granted (see, CPLR 3212; Ehrlich v American Moninger Greenhouse Mfg. Corp., 26 NY2d 255). The affidavit of the plaintiffs managing partner was sufficient to establish that the defendant did not repay the subject loan.

Moreover, the award of attorneys’ fees, as provided for in the promissory note, was reasonable. Bracken, J. P., Miller, Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 384, 638 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-financial-v-lauria-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack