Ligon v. Blake

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ligon v. Blake

100 A.D.3d 836, 953 N.Y.S.2d 889

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

DecidedNovember 21, 2012

StatusPublished

This text of 100 A.D.3d 836 (Ligon v. Blake) 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

Ligon v. Blake, 100 A.D.3d 836, 953 N.Y.S.2d 889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action, inter alia, to impose a [837]*837constructive trust upon certain real property, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated March 31, 2011, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The defendants met their prima facie burden of establishing their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (id.). Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Austin and Cohen, JJ„, concur.

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

— In an action, inter alia, to impose a [837]*837constructive trust upon certain real property, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jacobson, J.), dated March 31, 2011, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The defendants met their prima facie burden of establishing their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (id.). Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Austin and Cohen, JJ„, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.3d 836, 953 N.Y.S.2d 889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ligon-v-blake-nyappdiv-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack