Ometz Realty Corp. v. Edwards

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ometz Realty Corp. v. Edwards

244 A.D.2d 468, 665 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11610

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

DecidedNovember 17, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 468 (Ometz Realty Corp. v. Edwards) 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

Ometz Realty Corp. v. Edwards, 244 A.D.2d 468, 665 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11610 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Richard Edwards, Jr., Carrie B. Edwards, Vannette Auto Supplies, Inc., and Bun-Kay Realty Corp. appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Yoswein, J.), dated July 3, 1996, as granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

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

The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in this action to foreclose a mortgage. The plaintiff established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the appellants failed to advance any defenses which could raise a triable issue of fact (see, North Fork Bank v Hamptons Mist Mgt. Corp., 225 AD2d 596; Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812; see also, Long Is. Sav. Bank v Denkensohn, 222 AD2d 659; Johnson v Gaughan, 128 AD2d 756).

[469]*469The appellants’ remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court, as they are raised, for the first time on appeal (see, Green Point Sav. Bank v Oppenheim, 217 AD2d 571), or are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to foreclose a mortgage, the defendants Richard Edwards, Jr., Carrie B. Edwards, Vannette Auto Supplies, Inc., and Bun-Kay Realty Corp. appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Yoswein, J.), dated July 3, 1996, as granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

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

The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment in this action to foreclose a mortgage. The plaintiff established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the appellants failed to advance any defenses which could raise a triable issue of fact (see, North Fork Bank v Hamptons Mist Mgt. Corp., 225 AD2d 596; Village Bank v Wild Oaks Holding, 196 AD2d 812; see also, Long Is. Sav. Bank v Denkensohn, 222 AD2d 659; Johnson v Gaughan, 128 AD2d 756).

[469]*469The appellants’ remaining contentions are either not properly before this Court, as they are raised, for the first time on appeal (see, Green Point Sav. Bank v Oppenheim, 217 AD2d 571), or are without merit. Thompson, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 468, 665 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11610, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ometz-realty-corp-v-edwards-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack