Greene v. Montone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greene v. Montone

202 A.D.2d 871, 610 N.Y.S.2d 880, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2833

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

DecidedMarch 24, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D.2d 871 (Greene v. Montone) 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

Greene v. Montone, 202 A.D.2d 871, 610 N.Y.S.2d 880, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2833 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court [872]*872(Conway, J.), entered November 20, 1992 in Albany County, which, inter alia, granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. A previous order of the court precluded plaintiff from giving any evidence at trial in relation to the complaint’s allegations. As a result of this prior order, plaintiff was barred from introducing any evidence regarding the central issues of liability and damages and could not therefore establish a cause of action. Plaintiff’s remaining arguments have been considered and rejected.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Casey, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

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

—Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court [872]*872(Conway, J.), entered November 20, 1992 in Albany County, which, inter alia, granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Supreme Court properly granted defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. A previous order of the court precluded plaintiff from giving any evidence at trial in relation to the complaint’s allegations. As a result of this prior order, plaintiff was barred from introducing any evidence regarding the central issues of liability and damages and could not therefore establish a cause of action. Plaintiff’s remaining arguments have been considered and rejected.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Casey, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 871, 610 N.Y.S.2d 880, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2833, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greene-v-montone-nyappdiv-1994.