Stein v. Randi Estates Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stein v. Randi Estates Corp.

52 A.D.2d 764, 382 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12522

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

DecidedMay 4, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.2d 764 (Stein v. Randi Estates Corp.) 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

Stein v. Randi Estates Corp., 52 A.D.2d 764, 382 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12522 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on October 17, 1975, granting summary judgment, striking appellant’s answer and referring the action to a Referee to ascertain the amount due respondents, unanimously affirmed, with $60 costs and disbursements to respondents. In this action to foreclose a first mortgage, defendant-appellant, holder of a second mortgage, opposed respondent’s motion for summary judgment alleging that certain participants in the first mortgage engaged in a scheme to defraud appellant. A review of the record discloses no facts upon which this claim of fraud can rest. Therefore, the court below properly granted the motion for summary judgment in finding "no facts presented in opposition” to the motion. Concur —Murphy, J. P., Lupiano, Birns, Silverman and Lane, JJ.

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

Order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on October 17, 1975, granting summary judgment, striking appellant’s answer and referring the action to a Referee to ascertain the amount due respondents, unanimously affirmed, with $60 costs and disbursements to respondents. In this action to foreclose a first mortgage, defendant-appellant, holder of a second mortgage, opposed respondent’s motion for summary judgment alleging that certain participants in the first mortgage engaged in a scheme to defraud appellant. A review of the record discloses no facts upon which this claim of fraud can rest. Therefore, the court below properly granted the motion for summary judgment in finding "no facts presented in opposition” to the motion. Concur —Murphy, J. P., Lupiano, Birns, Silverman and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 764, 382 N.Y.S.2d 774, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stein-v-randi-estates-corp-nyappdiv-1976.