Roberts-Gordon Appliance Corp. v. M. Parisi & Son Construction Co.

96 A.D.2d 719, 465 N.Y.S.2d 90, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19284

Opinion

— Order and judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff’s documentary and other proof demonstrated its entitlement to summary judgment. It then became defendant’s burden to demonstrate by admissible evidence the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Defendant failed to do so and Special Term properly granted summary judgment. The affidavit submitted by defendant’s employee contains nonspecific and conclusory averments which do not refute the documentary proof submitted by plaintiff. (Appeal from order and judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Cook, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Hancock, Jr., Doerr, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

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

Roberts-Gordon Appliance Corp. v. M. Parisi & Son Construction Co., 96 A.D.2d 719, 465 N.Y.S.2d 90, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19284 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

96 A.D.2d 719 (Roberts-Gordon Appliance Corp. v. M. Parisi & Son Construction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zuckerman v. City of New York
404 N.E.2d 718 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)