Gresalfi v. Klein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gresalfi v. Klein

279 A.D.2d 449, 718 N.Y.S.2d 859, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 133

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 279 A.D.2d 449 (Gresalfi v. Klein) 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

Gresalfi v. Klein, 279 A.D.2d 449, 718 N.Y.S.2d 859, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover a down payment given under a contract for the sale of [450]*450real property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), dated September 15, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the complaint and granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting therefrom the provision granting the cross motion and substituting therefor a provision denying the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There are issues of fact requiring the denial of summary judgment. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover a down payment given under a contract for the sale of [450]*450real property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), dated September 15, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the complaint and granted the defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is modified by deleting therefrom the provision granting the cross motion and substituting therefor a provision denying the cross motion; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There are issues of fact requiring the denial of summary judgment. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Santucci and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 A.D.2d 449, 718 N.Y.S.2d 859, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 133, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gresalfi-v-klein-nyappdiv-2001.