Morales v. 78 4th Avenue Corp.

57 A.D.3d 748, 868 N.Y.2d 901
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 16, 2008·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

A motion to dismiss a complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) “may be appropriately granted only where the documentary evidence utterly refutes plaintiffs factual allegations, conclusively establishing a defense as a matter of law” (Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d 314, 326 [2002]; see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 88 [1994]; Kalmon Dolgin Affiliates of Long Is. v Robert Plan Corp., 248 AD2d 594 [1998]). As the [749]*749Supreme Court properly concluded, the documentary evidence submitted by the defendants in support of their cross motion to dismiss does not establish their defense as a matter of law or definitely dispose of the allegations in the complaint. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ cross motion to dismiss the complaint. Mastro, J.E, Miller, Balkin and McCarthy, JJ., concur.

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

Morales v. 78 4th Avenue Corp., 57 A.D.3d 748, 868 N.Y.2d 901 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

57 A.D.3d 748 (Morales v. 78 4th Avenue Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP
69 A.D.3d 191 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)