Velardi v. Lerman

203 A.D.2d 929, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1007
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1994·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Because plaintiffs mechanic’s lien had expired, Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s first cause of action to foreclose that lien. Supreme Court properly denied, however, defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s causes of action for breach of contract and quantum meruit because, accepting as true the evidence presented by plaintiff, there is at least arguably a triable issue (see, Hourigan v McGarry, 106 AD2d 845, appeal dismissed 65 NY2d 637). Supreme Court’s order is modified, therefore, to grant in part defendants’ motion for [930] summary judgment by dismissing plaintiffs first cause of action. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Law-ton, Fallon, Davis and Boehm, JJ.

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

Velardi v. Lerman, 203 A.D.2d 929, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1007 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

203 A.D.2d 929 (Velardi v. Lerman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

John Mezzalingua Associates., Inc. v. Walker
6 A.D.3d 1158 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Apple v. Apple
307 A.D.2d 753 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)