HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Decaudin
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*695A motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) may be granted only where “the documentary evidence that forms the basis of the defense [is] such that it resolves all factual issues as a matter of law, and conclusively disposes of the plaintiffs claims” (Saxony Ice Co., Div. of Springfield Ice Co., Inc. v Ultimate Energy Rest. Corp., 27 AD3d 445, 446 [2006]; see Museum Trading Co. v Bantry, 281 AD2d 524, 525 [2001]). The documentary evidence submitted by the defendant Naida I. Velazquez was sufficient to demonstrate that the subject conveyance to the defendant Bruno Decaudin was…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Diocese of Buffalo v. McCarthyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Lipman v. VebeliunasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Rende & Esposito Consultants, Inc. v. St. Augustine's Roman Catholic ChurchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Unterberg v. . ElderNew York Court of Appeals · 1914
- Museum Trading Co. v. BantryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Town of Riverhead v. SilvermanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- NJ Lenders Corp. v. CosentinoAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2010