Stowell v. Cicero Cheese Manufacturing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stowell v. Cicero Cheese Manufacturing Corp.

100 A.D.2d 736, 473 N.Y.S.2d 734, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17736

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

DecidedMarch 6, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 100 A.D.2d 736 (Stowell v. Cicero Cheese Manufacturing 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

Stowell v. Cicero Cheese Manufacturing Corp., 100 A.D.2d 736, 473 N.Y.S.2d 734, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17736 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, with costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: Defendant Zaccaria’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action should not have been granted, since triable issues of fact exist regarding his liability under section 273 of the Debtor and Creditor Law. Defendant, as the moving party, has the burden to establish that the cause of action has no merit (CPLR 3212, subd [b]), and he has not demonstrated that the transfer of corporate assets to him was made for fair consideration. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Oswego County, Miller, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, O’Donnell, Moule and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, with costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: Defendant Zaccaria’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the third cause of action should not have been granted, since triable issues of fact exist regarding his liability under section 273 of the Debtor and Creditor Law. Defendant, as the moving party, has the burden to establish that the cause of action has no merit (CPLR 3212, subd [b]), and he has not demonstrated that the transfer of corporate assets to him was made for fair consideration. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Oswego County, Miller, J. — dismiss complaint.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Doerr, O’Donnell, Moule and Schnepp, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

100 A.D.2d 736, 473 N.Y.S.2d 734, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stowell-v-cicero-cheese-manufacturing-corp-nyappdiv-1984.