Rudic v. Constante

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rudic v. Constante

262 A.D.2d 547, 691 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7053

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

DecidedJune 21, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D.2d 547 (Rudic v. Constante) 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

Rudic v. Constante, 262 A.D.2d 547, 691 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7053 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for conversion and unjust enrichment, the- defendants [548]*548Greenpoint Savings Bank and Cullen and Dykman appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered April 24, 1998, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

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

The Supreme Court properly determined that numerous issues of fact precluded summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the appellants (see, e.g., Shapiro v McNeill, 92 NY2d 91, 96; Matter of White v City of Mount Vernon, 221 AD2d 345, 346; Nathan v Bernstein, 252 App Div 497, 499). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for conversion and unjust enrichment, the- defendants [548]*548Greenpoint Savings Bank and Cullen and Dykman appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered April 24, 1998, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

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

The Supreme Court properly determined that numerous issues of fact precluded summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the appellants (see, e.g., Shapiro v McNeill, 92 NY2d 91, 96; Matter of White v City of Mount Vernon, 221 AD2d 345, 346; Nathan v Bernstein, 252 App Div 497, 499). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 547, 691 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rudic-v-constante-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack