United States Rebar, Inc. v. J.C. Contracting Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

United States Rebar, Inc. v. J.C. Contracting Corp.

275 A.D.2d 654, 713 N.Y.S.2d 684, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9951

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

DecidedSeptember 26, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 654 (United States Rebar, Inc. v. J.C. Contracting 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

United States Rebar, Inc. v. J.C. Contracting Corp., 275 A.D.2d 654, 713 N.Y.S.2d 684, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9951 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered April 23, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, granted plaintiff sub-subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment on its causes of action for labor and materials furnished against defendant subcontractor and defendant surety of the subcontractor, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion was properly granted in view of plaintiffs proof that the work for which it seeks payment was accepted by the owner, the architects and defendant subcontractor itself on December 24, 1997. Defendants’ present claims that such work was unsatisfactory were properly rejected by the IAS Court for lack of evidentiary support. Concur — Lerner, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered April 23, 1999, which, insofar as appealed from, granted plaintiff sub-subcontractor’s motion for summary judgment on its causes of action for labor and materials furnished against defendant subcontractor and defendant surety of the subcontractor, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion was properly granted in view of plaintiffs proof that the work for which it seeks payment was accepted by the owner, the architects and defendant subcontractor itself on December 24, 1997. Defendants’ present claims that such work was unsatisfactory were properly rejected by the IAS Court for lack of evidentiary support. Concur — Lerner, J. P., Andrias, Saxe, Buckley and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 654, 713 N.Y.S.2d 684, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9951, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-rebar-inc-v-jc-contracting-corp-nyappdiv-2000.