Opinion
June 15, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Stuart C. Cohen, J.).
Notwithstanding that the court considered the motion for discharge pursuant to CPLR 1006 without a full, written notice of motion, defendant-appellant was given adequate opportunity to demonstrate that plaintiff had some possible stake in the disputed funds, and was unable to do so (cf., Birnbaum v. Marine Midland Bank, 96 A.D.2d 776, 777). Summary judgment was appropriately denied, since the record suggests that much has been hidden (see, Karen S. v. Streitferdt, 172 A.D.2d 440).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Milonas, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.