From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bhatti v. Roche

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 31, 1988
140 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Opinion

May 31, 1988

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

"Summary judgment is a drastic remedy which should not be granted where there is any doubt about the existence of a triable issue of fact" (Sherman v Town of Rhinebeck, 133 A.D.2d 77, 78). The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. There exist triable issues of fact as to whether the defendants represented that the real property in question could be subdivided and whether, in fact, the real property in question may be subdivided. Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bhatti v. Roche

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 31, 1988
140 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)
Case details for

Bhatti v. Roche

Case Details

Full title:DHARAM S. BHATTI, Respondent, v. BONNIE A. ROCHE et al., Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: May 31, 1988

Citations

140 A.D.2d 660 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)

Citing Cases

Zubli v. 36 Middle Neck Rd., Inc.

It is well settled that summary judgment is a drastic remedy which should not be granted where there is any…

Zodan v. Tucker

It is well settled that the proponent of a motion for summary judgment must make a prima facie showing of…