TPZ Corp. v. Rigakos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

TPZ Corp. v. Rigakos

226 A.D.2d 445, 640 N.Y.S.2d 803, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3560

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

DecidedApril 8, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 445 (TPZ Corp. v. Rigakos) 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

TPZ Corp. v. Rigakos, 226 A.D.2d 445, 640 N.Y.S.2d 803, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3560 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover on two promissory notes, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Amann, J.), dated March 13, 1995, which granted the plaintiff’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3213 for summary judgment in lieu of complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants’ unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations of lack of consideration and fraud in the inducement were insufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; Germano v Friedman, 221 AD2d 501). We have reviewed the defendants’ remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover on two promissory notes, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Amann, J.), dated March 13, 1995, which granted the plaintiff’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3213 for summary judgment in lieu of complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendants’ unsubstantiated, conclusory allegations of lack of consideration and fraud in the inducement were insufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; Germano v Friedman, 221 AD2d 501). We have reviewed the defendants’ remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 A.D.2d 445, 640 N.Y.S.2d 803, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tpz-corp-v-rigakos-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack