Legal Opinion

Hardy v. Ziegenbalg

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

Decided June 15, 1930PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Order granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and judgment entered thereon unanimously affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. . The appellant gives no explanation of why she made and signed the notes in suit. Her obligation on a motion of this character cannot rest upon the answer, but is to show by affidavit such facts as would establish that there was an issue to be tried. (O’Meara Co. v. National Park Bank, 239 N. Y. 386, 395; Commonwealth Fuel Co., Inc., v. Powpit Co., Inc., 212 App. Div. 553, 557.) Simply stating that she did not receive the moneys *709does not make out…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Maurice O'Meara Co. v. National Park BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
  2. Commonwealth Fuel Co. v. Powpit Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Werger v. Haines Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API