M. Viaggio & Sons, Inc. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

M. Viaggio & Sons, Inc. v. City of New York

91 A.D.2d 607, 458 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19452

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 91 A.D.2d 607 (M. Viaggio & Sons, Inc. v. City of New York) 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

M. Viaggio & Sons, Inc. v. City of New York, 91 A.D.2d 607, 458 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19452 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated February 2, 1982, which denied its motion for summary judgment and for an assessment of damages. Order modified, on the law, by directing that summary judgment be granted in favor of the plaintiff on the issue of liability only. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. On this appeal, the defendant concedes that plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on the issue of liability. However, a trial is still required with respect to whether the contractual formula for computing plaintiff’s damages is void and unenforceable. Under the circumstances and in the interest of judicial economy, the amount of plaintiff’s damages should also be determined at that trial (see CPLR 3212, subd [e]; Lieberman v Larkin, 45 AD2d 965). Titone, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Boyers, 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, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated February 2, 1982, which denied its motion for summary judgment and for an assessment of damages. Order modified, on the law, by directing that summary judgment be granted in favor of the plaintiff on the issue of liability only. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. On this appeal, the defendant concedes that plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on the issue of liability. However, a trial is still required with respect to whether the contractual formula for computing plaintiff’s damages is void and unenforceable. Under the circumstances and in the interest of judicial economy, the amount of plaintiff’s damages should also be determined at that trial (see CPLR 3212, subd [e]; Lieberman v Larkin, 45 AD2d 965). Titone, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Boyers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 A.D.2d 607, 458 N.Y.S.2d 193, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/m-viaggio-sons-inc-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack