Legal Opinion

Vamattam v. Thomas

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

Decided June 13, 1994PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), dated May 21, 1992, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that "the drastic remedy of summary judgment is appropriate * * * where a thorough examination of the merits clearly demonstrates the absence of any triable issue of fact” (Piccirillo v Piccirillo, 156 AD2d 748, 750; see also, Marine Midland Bank v Dino & Artie’s Automatic…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Dino & Artie's Automatic Transmission Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
  2. Ellenville National Bank v. FreundAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. Piccirillo v. PiccirilloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. North Fork Bank Corp. v. Graphic Forms Associates, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  2. Moezinia v. BaroukhianAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API