Nolan & Heller v. Weis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nolan & Heller v. Weis

59 A.D.2d 810, 399 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13889

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

DecidedOctober 27, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 59 A.D.2d 810 (Nolan & Heller v. Weis) 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

Nolan & Heller v. Weis, 59 A.D.2d 810, 399 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered November 17, 1976 in Albany County, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. This action was brought by plaintiff law firm to recover for legal services. The verified complaint sets forth two causes of action, one for professional services rendered and the second for an account stated. The answer contained a general denial. The record reveals that defendant admits that legal services were performed, and that he received statements over a two-year period and made no complaint. The record also reveals that defendant, during the period in question, made two $500 payments which were reflected in subsequent statements. Special Term granted summary judgment to plaintiff and this appeal ensued. Examination of the record clearly demonstrates that plaintiff made out a prima facie case. It was, therefore, incumbent on defendant to lay bare his proof in order to establish a defense to the action (Di Sabato v Soffes, 9 AD2d 297). This he failed to do. The order should be affirmed (Steingart Assoc, v Sandler, 28 AD2d 801). Order affirmed, with costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Mahoney, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered November 17, 1976 in Albany County, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. This action was brought by plaintiff law firm to recover for legal services. The verified complaint sets forth two causes of action, one for professional services rendered and the second for an account stated. The answer contained a general denial. The record reveals that defendant admits that legal services were performed, and that he received statements over a two-year period and made no complaint. The record also reveals that defendant, during the period in question, made two $500 payments which were reflected in subsequent statements. Special Term granted summary judgment to plaintiff and this appeal ensued. Examination of the record clearly demonstrates that plaintiff made out a prima facie case. It was, therefore, incumbent on defendant to lay bare his proof in order to establish a defense to the action (Di Sabato v Soffes, 9 AD2d 297). This he failed to do. The order should be affirmed (Steingart Assoc, v Sandler, 28 AD2d 801). Order affirmed, with costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Mahoney, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 A.D.2d 810, 399 N.Y.S.2d 80, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nolan-heller-v-weis-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack