Tunick v. Goldstein

226 A.D.2d 705, 642 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4678
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 29, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and negligence, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered June 2, 1995, as granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the third and fourth causes of action asserted in the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the Supreme Court properly dismissed their causes of action alleging negligence by the defendant, since the allegations of purportedly negligent acts constitute nothing more than allegations of a breach of contract (see, 431 Conklin Corp. v Rice, 181 AD2d 716). Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

Tunick v. Goldstein, 226 A.D.2d 705, 642 N.Y.S.2d 539, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4678 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

226 A.D.2d 705 (Tunick v. Goldstein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Malek v. Allcity Insurance
264 A.D.2d 468 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)