O'Connor v. Blodnick Abramowitz & Blodnick

242 A.D.2d 324, 661 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8321
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 18, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, fraud in the inducement, and conversion, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Brien, J.), dated July 29, 1996, as granted those branches of the defendants’ motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth causes of action asserted in the complaint.

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

The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s first, second, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth causes of action, since, with respect to those claims, the defendants established entitlement to judgment as a matter of law and the plaintiff failed to proffer sufficient proof to demonstrate the existence of material issues of fact (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Miller, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

O'Connor v. Blodnick Abramowitz & Blodnick, 242 A.D.2d 324, 661 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8321 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

242 A.D.2d 324 (O'Connor v. Blodnick Abramowitz & Blodnick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Fitch v. TMF Systems, Inc.
272 A.D.2d 775 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)