From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Coury v. Arcuri

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1999
262 A.D.2d 268 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Submitted April 20, 1999

June 1, 1999

In an action, inter alia, to recover the plaintiffs alleged one-half interest in certain bank accounts, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), entered March 27, 1998, which denied his motion for partial summary judgment.

Hagan Coury Associates, Brooklyn, N.Y. (William J. Coury of counsel), for appellant.

Kelly, Luglio Arcuri, LLP, Deer Park, N.Y. (Sheela M. Papol of counsel), for respondents.

WILLIAM D. FRIEDMANN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, LEO F. McGINITY, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that triable issues of fact exist precluding summary judgment in this case. While the affidavits submitted by the defendants in opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie case for summary judgment are based on their alleged conversations with the decedent Mabel Coury, evidence excludable by CPLR 4519 may be considered to defeat a motion for summary judgment ( see, Phillips v. Kantor Co., 31 N.Y.2d 307; McEvoy v. Garcia, 114 A.D.2d 401; Tancredi v. Mannino, 75 A.D.2d 579).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Coury v. Arcuri

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 1, 1999
262 A.D.2d 268 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Coury v. Arcuri

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH COURY, etc., appellant, v. CATHERINE ARCURI, et al., respondents

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1999

Citations

262 A.D.2d 268 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
689 N.Y.S.2d 648

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Cavallo

Undue influence "can be shown by all the facts and circumstances surrounding the testator, the nature of the…

Harris v. Pitts

In opposition, Harris failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d…