Levine v. Kesef Consultants, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Levine v. Kesef Consultants, Ltd.

92 A.D.2d 805, 460 N.Y.S.2d 53, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17182

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

DecidedMarch 17, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 92 A.D.2d 805 (Levine v. Kesef Consultants, Ltd.) 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

Levine v. Kesef Consultants, Ltd., 92 A.D.2d 805, 460 N.Y.S.2d 53, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17182 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment entered November 1, 1982 and order entered October 20, 1982, Supreme Court, New York County (Blyn, J.), granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, in part, and awarding summary judgment to plaintiff in part, is reversed, on the law, to the extent appealed from by defendants, and plaintiff’s request for summary judgment is denied, without costs. Notwithstanding the written agreement for purchase of a debenture, there is an issue of fact as to whether plaintiff knew that no debentures were available and requested that stock be substituted. Further we note that although all causes of action in the complaint appear to be directed against both defendants, the first cause of action appears to allege only an agreement with the individual defendant. We do not pass on the propriety of the judgment and order to the extent that they grant relief to defendants as there is no appeal from that branch of the judgment and order. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Silverman, Bloom and Kassal, JJ.

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

— Judgment entered November 1, 1982 and order entered October 20, 1982, Supreme Court, New York County (Blyn, J.), granting defendants’ motion for summary judgment, in part, and awarding summary judgment to plaintiff in part, is reversed, on the law, to the extent appealed from by defendants, and plaintiff’s request for summary judgment is denied, without costs. Notwithstanding the written agreement for purchase of a debenture, there is an issue of fact as to whether plaintiff knew that no debentures were available and requested that stock be substituted. Further we note that although all causes of action in the complaint appear to be directed against both defendants, the first cause of action appears to allege only an agreement with the individual defendant. We do not pass on the propriety of the judgment and order to the extent that they grant relief to defendants as there is no appeal from that branch of the judgment and order. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Silverman, Bloom and Kassal, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 805, 460 N.Y.S.2d 53, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levine-v-kesef-consultants-ltd-nyappdiv-1983.