Gray v. Ratzker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gray v. Ratzker

150 A.D.2d 343, 543 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5684

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

DecidedMay 1, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 150 A.D.2d 343 (Gray v. Ratzker) 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

Gray v. Ratzker, 150 A.D.2d 343, 543 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover on a promissory note, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Collins, J.), dated May 9, 1988, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3213 for summary judgment in lieu of complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on a promissory note executed by the defendant in connection with his purchase of the plaintiff’s accounting practice. The defendant’s opposition papers adequately alleged a defense of fraud in the inducement and, thus, were sufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s summary judgment motion (see, Pioneer Credit Corp. v Bon Bon Cleaners Corp., 38 AD2d 743; cf., Faustini v Darth Provisions Co., 131 AD2d 809; Ward v Hanley, 130 AD2d 742). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Rubin, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, 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 note, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Collins, J.), dated May 9, 1988, which denied his motion pursuant to CPLR 3213 for summary judgment in lieu of complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on a promissory note executed by the defendant in connection with his purchase of the plaintiff’s accounting practice. The defendant’s opposition papers adequately alleged a defense of fraud in the inducement and, thus, were sufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s summary judgment motion (see, Pioneer Credit Corp. v Bon Bon Cleaners Corp., 38 AD2d 743; cf., Faustini v Darth Provisions Co., 131 AD2d 809; Ward v Hanley, 130 AD2d 742). Mollen, P. J., Bracken, Rubin, Sullivan and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 A.D.2d 343, 543 N.Y.S.2d 316, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-ratzker-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack