Legal Opinion

Deering v. Karin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 3, 2001PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously modified on the law and in the exercise of discretion and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted that part of the motion of defendant Laura Karin seeking summary judgment dismissing the first two causes of action for fraud against her. Plaintiff Carl G. Deering allegedly was induced to convey plaintiffs’ home to defendant William Karin in 1991 upon his promise to reconvey it when plaintiffs repaid a loan in the amount of $11,500 and to convey two acres of an adjoining parcel that defendants William…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Simonds v. SimondsNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
  2. Ely-Cruikshank Co. v. Bank of MontrealNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Non-Linear Trading Co. v. Braddis Associates, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
  4. WIT Holding Corp. v. KleinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  5. Gordon v. Dino De Laurentiis Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re the Estate of PiccilloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API