Neighborhood Check Cashing Corp. v. Action Check Cashing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Neighborhood Check Cashing Corp. v. Action Check Cashing Corp.

280 A.D.2d 589, 720 N.Y.S.2d 805, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1688

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 280 A.D.2d 589 (Neighborhood Check Cashing Corp. v. Action Check Cashing Corp.) 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

Neighborhood Check Cashing Corp. v. Action Check Cashing Corp., 280 A.D.2d 589, 720 N.Y.S.2d 805, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1688 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated November 15, 1999, as granted those branches of the defendants’ motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first, second, and eighth causes of action, and denied its cross motion, in effect, for summary judgment on those causes of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the first, second, and eighth causes of action (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557), and its cross motion was therefore properly denied. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Luciano and Schmidt, 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, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated November 15, 1999, as granted those branches of the defendants’ motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first, second, and eighth causes of action, and denied its cross motion, in effect, for summary judgment on those causes of action.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contentions, the defendants were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the first, second, and eighth causes of action (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557), and its cross motion was therefore properly denied. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 589, 720 N.Y.S.2d 805, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neighborhood-check-cashing-corp-v-action-check-cashing-corp-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack