Rotunno v. Stiles

7 A.D.3d 504, 775 N.Y.S.2d 573
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 3, 2004
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 7 A.D.3d 504 (Rotunno v. Stiles) 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
Rotunno v. Stiles, 7 A.D.3d 504, 775 N.Y.S.2d 573 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

an action, inter alia, to recover money damages for the failure to properly inspect real property, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), entered December 23, 2002, which, upon reargument and renewal, adhered to so much of a prior order of the same court dated September 24, 2002, as granted the mo[505]*505tion of the defendants Jean Candelera, Glenn Gabberty, and Glenn Gabberty & Associates for summary judgment dismissing the plaintiffs’ sixth and seventh causes of action insofar as asserted against those defendants.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the sixth and seventh causes of action insofar as asserted against the defendant appraisers Jena Candelora, Glenn Gabberty, and Glenn Gabberty & Associates (hereinafter collectively the appraisers). Those causes of action, in effect, alleged a breach of the appraisers’ duty to the plaintiffs. Under the circumstance of this case, the appraisers owed no duty to the plaintiffs (see generally Chambers v Executive Mtge. Corp., 229 AD2d 416 [1996]; cf. Rodin Props.-Shore Mall v Ullman, 264 AD2d 367, 367-369 [1999]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the appraisers’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the sixth and seventh causes of action insofar as asserted against them. Santucci, J.P., Florio, Schmidt and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Mave Hotel Invs. LLC v. TS Worldwide, LLC
2021 NY Slip Op 02993 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2021)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 A.D.3d 504, 775 N.Y.S.2d 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rotunno-v-stiles-nyappdiv-2004.