From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Simpson v. King

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 2008
48 A.D.3d 788 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2007-00628.

February 26, 2008.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (O'Rourke, J.), dated December 5, 2006, which granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Randall S. King which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

Ronald K. Friedman, Esq., PLLC, Fishkill, N.Y., for appellant.

Frank A. Catalina, Peekskill, N.Y., for respondent.

Before: Fisher, J.P., Miller, McCarthy and Chambers, JJ.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and that branch of the motion of the defendant Randall S. King which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him is denied.

The defendant Randall S. King failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320). King's submission on his motion consisted of his counsel's affirmation, which, along with its attachments, was insufficient to make the requisite showing ( see Stahl v Stralberg, 287 AD2d 613, 614). Accordingly, that branch of his motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him should have been denied.

King's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Simpson v. King

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 2008
48 A.D.3d 788 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Simpson v. King

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD SIMPSON, Appellant, v. RANDALL S. KING, Respondent, et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 26, 2008

Citations

48 A.D.3d 788 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1740
851 N.Y.S.2d 357

Citing Cases

ING Bank F.S.B. v. DiLuggio

Birchwood failed to raise a triable issue of fact as the general denials set forth in its answer are…

IN MATTER OF FIA CARD SERVS. N.A. v. THOMPSON

Such a petition, and/or counsel's affirmation, along with their attachments, however, are insufficient to…