Hugh O'Kane Electric Co. v. County of Westchester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hugh O'Kane Electric Co. v. County of Westchester

54 A.D.3d 660, 862 N.Y.S.2d 804

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

DecidedSeptember 2, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 54 A.D.3d 660 (Hugh O'Kane Electric Co. v. County of Westchester) 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

Hugh O'Kane Electric Co. v. County of Westchester, 54 A.D.3d 660, 862 N.Y.S.2d 804 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rudolph, J.), dated May 8, 2007, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in response to the defendant’s prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based on the unambiguous terms of the contract. The contract should be enforced according to its plain meaning (see W.W.W. Assoc. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157, 162 [1990]; McGuckin v Snapple Distribs., Inc., 41 AD3d 795 [2007]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action. Ritter, J.P., Miller, Dillon and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rudolph, J.), dated May 8, 2007, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in response to the defendant’s prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law based on the unambiguous terms of the contract. The contract should be enforced according to its plain meaning (see W.W.W. Assoc. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157, 162 [1990]; McGuckin v Snapple Distribs., Inc., 41 AD3d 795 [2007]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action. Ritter, J.P., Miller, Dillon and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.3d 660, 862 N.Y.S.2d 804, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hugh-okane-electric-co-v-county-of-westchester-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack