National Enterprises, Inc. v. Certilman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

National Enterprises, Inc. v. Certilman

254 A.D.2d 264, 678 N.Y.S.2d 277, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10028

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

DecidedOctober 5, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 254 A.D.2d 264 (National Enterprises, Inc. v. Certilman) 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

National Enterprises, Inc. v. Certilman, 254 A.D.2d 264, 678 N.Y.S.2d 277, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10028 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover on an instrument for the payment of money only commenced by service of a notice of motion in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered June 12, 1997, which denied its motion for summary judgment and granted the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment. The broad language of the settlement agreement and release executed by the plaintiff’s predecessor is a complete defense to this action.

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover on an instrument for the payment of money only commenced by service of a notice of motion in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered June 12, 1997, which denied its motion for summary judgment and granted the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment. The broad language of the settlement agreement and release executed by the plaintiff’s predecessor is a complete defense to this action.

The plaintiff’s remaining contention is without merit. Rosenblatt, J. P., O’Brien, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

254 A.D.2d 264, 678 N.Y.S.2d 277, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-enterprises-inc-v-certilman-nyappdiv-1998.