Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency v. Musheyev
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the complaint. The plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof of the existence of the promissory note executed by the defendant and the defendant’s default in making payments pursuant to that note (see Verela v Citrus Lake Dev., Inc., 53 AD3d 574, 575 [2008]; Levien v Allen, 52 AD3d 578 [2008]; Anand v Wilson, 32 AD3d 808 [2006]). In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to a bona fide defense (see Quest Commercial,…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Quest Commercial, LLC v. RovnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Verela v. Citrus Lake Development, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Anand v. WilsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
- Famolaro v. Crest Offset, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Levien v. AllenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Jin Sheng He v. Sing Huei ChangAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Gullery v. ImburgioAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Washington Mutual Bank v. ValenciaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Rachmany v. RegevAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Ocean View Realty Co. v. ZissAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.