From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Winslow v. Norstar Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 17, 1987
127 A.D.2d 759 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

February 17, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Ain, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Although the documentary evidence submitted by the plaintiff established that the defendant provided him with erroneous information regarding the value of his Mariah Oil Gas Corp. stock on three quarterly statements, there are material issues of fact presented as to whether the plaintiff justifiably relied upon this information, and whether the defendant acted in good faith in providing this information. Therefore, summary judgment was properly denied to both parties (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; Friends of Animals v. Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 N.Y.2d 1065). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Winslow v. Norstar Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 17, 1987
127 A.D.2d 759 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Winslow v. Norstar Bank

Case Details

Full title:F. DANA WINSLOW, Appellant-Respondent, v. NORSTAR BANK, Formerly Known as…

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

Date published: Feb 17, 1987

Citations

127 A.D.2d 759 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Rovinsky v. Hispanidad Holidays, Inc.

The court denied the motion and the defendant appeals. We find that among the triable issues of fact which…

Fogel v. Hertz International, Ltd.

Further material issues of fact are whether the Hertz defendants acted in good faith in their advertising…