Speiser v. Nytronics, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Speiser v. Nytronics, Inc.

51 A.D.2d 735, 378 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11236

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 735 (Speiser v. Nytronics, 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

Speiser v. Nytronics, Inc., 51 A.D.2d 735, 378 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11236 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action on a promissory note in which plaintiff moved for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 23, 1974, which (1) granted plaintiff’s motion and (2) denied its cross motion for summary judgment. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiff brought this action to obtain a judgment on a promissory note. Defendant raised equitable defenses which deal with plaintiff’s improper motives for obtaining the judgment. Plaintiff was entitled to a judgment; should he act upon his alleged improper motives, the order appealed from will not prejudice defendant’s ability to again assert his equitable defenses at the proper time. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

In an action on a promissory note in which plaintiff moved for summary judgment in lieu of complaint, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered December 23, 1974, which (1) granted plaintiff’s motion and (2) denied its cross motion for summary judgment. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiff brought this action to obtain a judgment on a promissory note. Defendant raised equitable defenses which deal with plaintiff’s improper motives for obtaining the judgment. Plaintiff was entitled to a judgment; should he act upon his alleged improper motives, the order appealed from will not prejudice defendant’s ability to again assert his equitable defenses at the proper time. Hopkins, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Damiani, Christ and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 735, 378 N.Y.S.2d 781, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11236, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/speiser-v-nytronics-inc-nyappdiv-1976.