Legal Opinion · Dissent
Fuchs v. MiCAD Systems, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 29, 1988Published
1Dissent
Kupferman, J. P., and Ellerin, J.,
dissent in part in a memorandum by Ellerin, J., as follows: The defenses raised in opposition to this motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint are insufficient to establish any genuine reason to deny the motion.
The promissory notes here at issue were issued by MiCAD Systems, Inc. to the individual plaintiffs in May 1986. One note is dated May 22, 1986, and is payable to Ira Hayes Fuchs in the amount of $6,000 on August 15, 1986. Three notes, two in the amount of $20,000 each and one in the amount of *315$15,000, are dated May 30, 1986 and payable to Allen…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ehrlich v. American Moninger Greenhouse Manufacturing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1970
- P. D. J. Corp. v. Bansh Properties, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1969
- P. D. J. Corp. v. Bansh Properties, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1968