From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zellner v. Tarnell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 5, 2008
54 A.D.3d 329 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2007-11063.

August 5, 2008.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract for the sale of real property, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Loehr, J.), dated November 15, 2007, which granted the plaintiffs' motion, in effect, for summary judgment awarding them the down payment as liquidated damages under the contract.

Before: Spolzino, J.P., Fisher, Carni and Dickerson, JJ.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the plaintiffs motion, in effect, for summary judgment is denied.

The plaintiffs sellers failed to include a complete set of the pleadings and an affidavit in support of their motion for summary judgment, as required by CPLR 3212 (b). Accordingly, they were not entitled to summary judgment, and denial of their motion was required ( see Sendor v Chervin, 51 AD3d 1003; Thompson v Foreign Cars Ctr., Inc., 40 AD3d 965; Matsyuk v Konkalipos, 35 AD3d 675).

In light of our determination, we need not reach the appellants' remaining contentions.


Summaries of

Zellner v. Tarnell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 5, 2008
54 A.D.3d 329 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Zellner v. Tarnell

Case Details

Full title:RONALD ZELLNER et al., Respondents, v. PAUL TARNELL et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Aug 5, 2008

Citations

54 A.D.3d 329 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 6558
861 N.Y.S.2d 598

Citing Cases

Whalen v. Villegas

Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment could be summarily denied on the grounds its papers are procedurally…

Velen Med. v Greyhound Lines

Moreover, the plaintiff has not set forth sufficient cause or presented any newly discovered evidence which…