Jacobowitz v. State University of New York Health Science Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jacobowitz v. State University of New York Health Science Center

5 A.D.3d 352, 772 N.Y.S.2d 537, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2136

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

DecidedMarch 1, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 5 A.D.3d 352 (Jacobowitz v. State University of New York Health Science Center) 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

Jacobowitz v. State University of New York Health Science Center, 5 A.D.3d 352, 772 N.Y.S.2d 537, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2136 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages for breach of contract, the claimant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Read, J.), dated December 31, 2002, which granted the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Since the subject agreement was not approved by the state comptroller as required under State Finance Law § 112, the motion to dismiss the claim was properly granted (see Becker & Assoc. v State of New York, 48 NY2d 867 [1979]). Further, contrary to the claimant’s contention, there was no purpose in allowing further discovery. Santucci, J.P., Florio, Schmidt and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

In a claim to recover damages for breach of contract, the claimant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (Read, J.), dated December 31, 2002, which granted the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Since the subject agreement was not approved by the state comptroller as required under State Finance Law § 112, the motion to dismiss the claim was properly granted (see Becker & Assoc. v State of New York, 48 NY2d 867 [1979]). Further, contrary to the claimant’s contention, there was no purpose in allowing further discovery. Santucci, J.P., Florio, Schmidt and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 352, 772 N.Y.S.2d 537, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jacobowitz-v-state-university-of-new-york-health-science-center-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack