Sovik v. Shearson Lehman/American Express, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sovik v. Shearson Lehman/American Express, Inc.

127 A.D.2d 996, 512 N.Y.S.2d 751, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53422

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 127 A.D.2d 996 (Sovik v. Shearson Lehman/American Express, Inc.) 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

Sovik v. Shearson Lehman/American Express, Inc., 127 A.D.2d 996, 512 N.Y.S.2d 751, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53422 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and submission of controversy dismissed. Memorandum: The court erred in deciding a purported action on submitted facts pursuant to CPLR 3222 because such a submission must consist of a statement of all the facts upon which the controversy depends. The court improperly considered affidavits submitted by the parties which raised factual issues (see, Ditmars-31’ St. Dev. Corp. v Punia, 17 AD2d 357, 360). It is impossible to decide the case on the submission alone because it is incomplete. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Mordue, J. — submission of controversy.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and submission of controversy dismissed. Memorandum: The court erred in deciding a purported action on submitted facts pursuant to CPLR 3222 because such a submission must consist of a statement of all the facts upon which the controversy depends. The court improperly considered affidavits submitted by the parties which raised factual issues (see, Ditmars-31’ St. Dev. Corp. v Punia, 17 AD2d 357, 360). It is impossible to decide the case on the submission alone because it is incomplete. (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Mordue, J. — submission of controversy.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Denman, Pine and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

127 A.D.2d 996, 512 N.Y.S.2d 751, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 53422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sovik-v-shearson-lehmanamerican-express-inc-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack