Orix Credit Alliance, Inc. v. Fan Sy Productions, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Orix Credit Alliance, Inc. v. Fan Sy Productions, Inc.

215 A.D.2d 113, 625 N.Y.S.2d 910, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4656

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 2, 1995·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered February 25, 1994, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In light of the documentary evidence and the affidavits submitted in support of plaintiff’s motion, summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213 was warranted (see, Maglich v Saxe, Bacon & Bolan, 97 AD2d 19). The opposing papers merely contain unsupported, conclusory assertions. Indeed, the record demonstrates that, inter alia, defendants defaulted on payments due under the relevant lease, plaintiff rightfully repossessed the leased equipment, plaintiff properly notified defendants of the upcoming public sale of the equipment, and plaintiff properly served the sum[114]*114mons and motion papers upon defendants. Service upon a designated agent, pursuant to the terms of the lease and guaranties, clearly suffices (see, National Equip. Rental v Szukhent, 375 US 311). Moreover, while defendant challenges the signature of Sharon Savitt on the personal guaranty, the signature is duly notarized, and there is no evidence that satisfactorily rebuts the authenticity of this signature (see, Son Fong Lum v Antonelli, 102 AD2d 258, affd 64 NY2d 1158). Finally, we note that the public sale was carried out pursuant to commercially reasonable standards under article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.

We have considered all other issues raised by defendants and find them to be meritless. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered February 25, 1994, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In light of the documentary evidence and the affidavits submitted in support of plaintiff’s motion, summary judgment in lieu of complaint pursuant to CPLR 3213 was warranted (see, Maglich v Saxe, Bacon & Bolan, 97 AD2d 19). The opposing papers merely contain unsupported, conclusory assertions. Indeed, the record demonstrates that, inter alia, defendants defaulted on payments due under the relevant lease, plaintiff rightfully repossessed the leased equipment, plaintiff properly notified defendants of the upcoming public sale of the equipment, and plaintiff properly served the sum[114]*114mons and motion papers upon defendants. Service upon a designated agent, pursuant to the terms of the lease and guaranties, clearly suffices (see, National Equip. Rental v Szukhent, 375 US 311). Moreover, while defendant challenges the signature of Sharon Savitt on the personal guaranty, the signature is duly notarized, and there is no evidence that satisfactorily rebuts the authenticity of this signature (see, Son Fong Lum v Antonelli, 102 AD2d 258, affd 64 NY2d 1158). Finally, we note that the public sale was carried out pursuant to commercially reasonable standards under article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.

We have considered all other issues raised by defendants and find them to be meritless. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Kupferman, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Orix Credit Alliance, Inc. v. Fan Sy Productions, Inc., 215 A.D.2d 113, 625 N.Y.S.2d 910, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4656 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

215 A.D.2d 113 (Orix Credit Alliance, Inc. v. Fan Sy Productions, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related