Gaetana Mazzola v. Mary Mazzola Gaetana Mazzola v. Mary Mazzola

Gaetana Mazzola v. Mary Mazzola

NY.44543; 338 N.Y.S.2d 911; 40 A.D.2d 1017 (1972)

    • USD 0.99
    • USD 0.99

Descripción editorial

In our opinion, it was incumbent upon defendant to come forward with matter of an evidentiary nature to demonstrate the presence of triable issues. This the defendant failed to do. She failed to support by the requisite evidentiary demonstration her contention that a triable issue of fact exists, thereby precluding summary judgment relief. The motion should have been granted (Steingart Assoc. v. Sandler, 28 A.D.2d 801; Holdridge v. Town of Burlington, 32 A.D.2d 581). Disposition Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted.

GÉNERO
Técnicos y profesionales
PUBLICADO
1972
26 de diciembre
IDIOMA
EN
Inglés
EXTENSIÓN
2
Páginas
EDITORIAL
LawApp Publishers
VENTAS
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
TAMAÑO
66.5
KB

Más libros de Supreme Court of New York

Matter Richard M. Kessel v. Public Service Commission State New York Et Al. Matter Richard M. Kessel v. Public Service Commission State New York Et Al.
1987
Donna K. A. Dicocco v. Capital Area Community Health Plan Donna K. A. Dicocco v. Capital Area Community Health Plan
1988
Robert M. Gabrielli v. Chris Cornazzani Robert M. Gabrielli v. Chris Cornazzani
1988
William J. Kiernan Et Al. v. Gloria Thompson William J. Kiernan Et Al. v. Gloria Thompson
1987
Dennis Pemberton v. Dolphin Development Corporation Et Al. Dennis Pemberton v. Dolphin Development Corporation Et Al.
1987
Robert Jefferds v. Harold W. Ellis Robert Jefferds v. Harold W. Ellis
1987