George L. Penny, Inc. v. Zaweski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

George L. Penny, Inc. v. Zaweski

254 A.D.2d 255, 678 N.Y.S.2d 269, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10071

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

DecidedOctober 5, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 255 (George L. Penny, Inc. v. Zaweski) 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

George L. Penny, Inc. v. Zaweski, 254 A.D.2d 255, 678 N.Y.S.2d 269, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10071 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover upon a guaranty, commenced pursuant to CPLR 3213 by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), entered October 10,1997, which, upon the granting of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, was in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $93,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff established a prima facie case by setting forth the undisputed fact that the defendants defaulted on a guaranty pursuant to which they agreed to pay the debt incurred by the parents of the defendant Christine Zaweski in the sum of $120,500 (see, Colonial Commercial Corp. v Breskel Assocs., 238 AD2d 539). It was then incumbent on the defendants to come forward with proof of evidentiary facts showing the existence of a triable issue with respect to their defense (see, Colonial Commercial Corp. v Breskel Assocs., supra). The defendants’ unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations of constructive fraud and fraud in the inducement were insufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (see, Colonial Commercial Corp. v Breskel Assocs., supra; TPZ Corp. v Rigakos, 226 AD2d 445). Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover upon a guaranty, commenced pursuant to CPLR 3213 by motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), entered October 10,1997, which, upon the granting of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, was in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $93,000.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff established a prima facie case by setting forth the undisputed fact that the defendants defaulted on a guaranty pursuant to which they agreed to pay the debt incurred by the parents of the defendant Christine Zaweski in the sum of $120,500 (see, Colonial Commercial Corp. v Breskel Assocs., 238 AD2d 539). It was then incumbent on the defendants to come forward with proof of evidentiary facts showing the existence of a triable issue with respect to their defense (see, Colonial Commercial Corp. v Breskel Assocs., supra). The defendants’ unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations of constructive fraud and fraud in the inducement were insufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (see, Colonial Commercial Corp. v Breskel Assocs., supra; TPZ Corp. v Rigakos, 226 AD2d 445). Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 255, 678 N.Y.S.2d 269, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10071, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-l-penny-inc-v-zaweski-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack