Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Two Clinton Square Corp. v. Friedler

Two Clinton Square Corp. v. Friedler

91 A.D.2d 1195, 459 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16549
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 31, 1983·No. Appeal No. 2·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: Special Term properly vacated the notice to admit. A notice to admit may only be used to establish matters of fact. It is not intended to cover ultimate conclusions but only to eliminate as issues in litigation matters about which there should be no dispute at trial (Spawton v Strates Shows, 75 Misc 2d 813; Nader v General Motors Corp., 53 Misc 2d 515, affd 29 AD2d 632). We find paragraphs 89 through 119, which concern ultimate conclusions of fact and law, to be inappropriate. Plaintiff may submit a new notice to admit containing demands which are within the scope and intendment of CPLR 3123. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Murphy, J. — strike notice to admit.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Two Clinton Square Corp. v. Friedler, 91 A.D.2d 1195, 459 N.Y.S.2d 182, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16549 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

91 A.D.2d 1195 (Two Clinton Square Corp. v. Friedler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McCloud v. State of New York
2025 NY Slip Op 51205(U) (New York State Court of Claims, 2025)
Taylor v. Blair
116 A.D.2d 204 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
Berg v. Flower Fifth Avenue Hospital
102 A.D.2d 760 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)