N. Picco & Sons Contracting Co. v. Board of Education of the Bronxville School

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

N. Picco & Sons Contracting Co. v. Board of Education of the Bronxville School

71 A.D.3d 851, 895 N.Y.S.2d 881

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

DecidedMarch 16, 2010

StatusPublished

This text of 71 A.D.3d 851 (N. Picco & Sons Contracting Co. v. Board of Education of the Bronxville School) 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

N. Picco & Sons Contracting Co. v. Board of Education of the Bronxville School, 71 A.D.3d 851, 895 N.Y.S.2d 881 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract and wrongful termination of a construction contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), dated January 12, 2009, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the plaintiffs agreement to assign, as collateral security, any payment received as a result of the subject litigation did not deprive the plaintiff of standing to maintain the subject action (see Agristor Leasing v Barlow, 180 AD2d 899, 901 [1992]; Southern Assoc. v United Brands Co., 67 AD2d 199, 204 [1979]; Fifty States Mgt. Corp. v Pioneer Auto Parks, 44 AD2d 887, 888 [1974]). Accordingly, the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for summary judgment (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Rivera, J.P., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Roman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract and wrongful termination of a construction contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), dated January 12, 2009, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the plaintiffs agreement to assign, as collateral security, any payment received as a result of the subject litigation did not deprive the plaintiff of standing to maintain the subject action (see Agristor Leasing v Barlow, 180 AD2d 899, 901 [1992]; Southern Assoc. v United Brands Co., 67 AD2d 199, 204 [1979]; Fifty States Mgt. Corp. v Pioneer Auto Parks, 44 AD2d 887, 888 [1974]). Accordingly, the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for summary judgment (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Rivera, J.P., Angiolillo, Dickerson and Roman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 A.D.3d 851, 895 N.Y.S.2d 881, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/n-picco-sons-contracting-co-v-board-of-education-of-the-bronxville-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack