Legal Opinion

Sherman v. Hallmark

Civil Court of the City of New York

Decided August 23, 1999PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Debra Rose Samuels, J.

For the reasons stated below, respondent’s motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a), which the court elects to treat as a motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212, is denied. Petitioners’ cross motion for summary judgment in their favor is granted.

1. Summary Judgment May Properly be Granted

Respondent argues that petitioners’ cross motion for summary judgment must be denied because respondent has not yet answered, and CPLR 3212 (a) allows summary judgment only “after issue has been joined”. CPLR 3211 (c), however, provides that “Upon the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Four Seasons Hotels Ltd. v. VinnikAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  2. American List Corp. v. U.S. News & World Report, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. Babylon Associates v. County of SuffolkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  4. Callanan v. Keeseville, Ausable Chasm & Lake Champlain RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1910
  5. Windmuller v. PopeNew York Court of Appeals · 1887

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Brualdi v. IBERIA, Lineas Aereas de España, S.A.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API