Key Bank of Central New York v. Puliafico

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Key Bank of Central New York v. Puliafico

97 A.D.2d 966, 468 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20795

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1983

DocketAppeal No. 1

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 97 A.D.2d 966 (Key Bank of Central New York v. Puliafico) 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

Key Bank of Central New York v. Puliafico, 97 A.D.2d 966, 468 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20795 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment entered January 6,1982 granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment unanimously reversed. Order entered January 6,1982 denying defendants’ cross.motion unanimously affirmed, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Oneida County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Since defendants’ cross motion to dismiss (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 4) was denied, Special Term erred in granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (CPLR 3213) without giving defendants an opportunity to submit answering papers (see CPLR 2001, 3211, subd [f]; see, also, North Broadway Funding Corp. v Freed, 45 AD2d 759) (Appeal from orders and judgment of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Miller, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Order and judgment entered January 6,1982 granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment unanimously reversed. Order entered January 6,1982 denying defendants’ cross.motion unanimously affirmed, without costs, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Oneida County, for further proceedings in accordance with the following memorandum: Since defendants’ cross motion to dismiss (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 4) was denied, Special Term erred in granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (CPLR 3213) without giving defendants an opportunity to submit answering papers (see CPLR 2001, 3211, subd [f]; see, also, North Broadway Funding Corp. v Freed, 45 AD2d 759) (Appeal from orders and judgment of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Miller, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 A.D.2d 966, 468 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20795, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/key-bank-of-central-new-york-v-puliafico-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack