Legal Opinion
Marom v. Anselmo
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 6, 2011PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*623On a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) for failure to state a cause of action, the court must accept the facts alleged in the pleading as true, accord the plaintiff the benefit of every possible inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory (see Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d 314, 326 [2002]; Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87 [1994]; Prestige Caterers, Inc. v Siegel, 88 AD3d 679 [2011]; Peery v United Capital Corp., 84 AD3d 1201 [2011]). However, where, as here, evidentiary material is submitted and considered on…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Leon v. MartinezNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Guggenheimer v. GinzburgNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Goshen v. Mutual Life InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Rudolf v. Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & SauerNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- Arnav Industries, Inc. Retirement Trust v. BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 2001
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Robertson v. WellsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Gaskin v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Board of Mgrs. of 285 Driggs Ave. Condominium v. 285 Driggs Ave., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
- Gaskin v. HarrisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Piccoli v. Cerra, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019