Planned Building Services, Inc. v. S.L. Green Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Planned Building Services, Inc. v. S.L. Green Realty Corp.

300 A.D.2d 89, 750 N.Y.S.2d 851, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12164

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

DecidedDecember 12, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 300 A.D.2d 89 (Planned Building Services, Inc. v. S.L. Green Realty 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

Planned Building Services, Inc. v. S.L. Green Realty Corp., 300 A.D.2d 89, 750 N.Y.S.2d 851, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12164 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered on or about November 2, 2001, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as the record fails to disclose a triable issue as to the existence of an enforceable contract between plaintiff and a third party that might serve as a predicate for plaintiffs claim for tortious interference with contractual relations, the grant of defendants’ motion for summary judgment was proper (see Foster v Churchill, 87 NY2d 744, 749-750; Bayside Carting v Chic Cleaners, 240 AD2d 687). Plaintiffs contention that the motion should have been denied to afford it additional discovery [90]*90is unavailing, no basis for plaintiff’s belief that further discovery would yield evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue having been set forth (see Pow v Black, 182 AD2d 484, 485). Concur — Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Buckley and Gonzalez, 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 on or about November 2, 2001, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Inasmuch as the record fails to disclose a triable issue as to the existence of an enforceable contract between plaintiff and a third party that might serve as a predicate for plaintiffs claim for tortious interference with contractual relations, the grant of defendants’ motion for summary judgment was proper (see Foster v Churchill, 87 NY2d 744, 749-750; Bayside Carting v Chic Cleaners, 240 AD2d 687). Plaintiffs contention that the motion should have been denied to afford it additional discovery [90]*90is unavailing, no basis for plaintiff’s belief that further discovery would yield evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue having been set forth (see Pow v Black, 182 AD2d 484, 485). Concur — Williams, P.J., Nardelli, Mazzarelli, Buckley and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 89, 750 N.Y.S.2d 851, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/planned-building-services-inc-v-sl-green-realty-corp-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack