2025) ( here ), the Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the denial of a motion for summary judgment Thereafter, defendants moved for, inter alia , summary judgment on that counterclaim. Plaintiffs opposed the motion and cross-moved for summary judgment on the cause of action for specific

of 2014, Moorjani, in his capacity as Senior Participant and majority Unitholder, agreed with IAC to accelerate Moorjani notified plaintiffs and other Plan participants of the acceleration on March 21, 2014. the Units, withheld information from Moorjani with respect to Tinder’s value, and coerced Moorjani to accelerate Tinder (which was known to IAC at the time to be nearly $1 Billion) at the time of the settlement and accelerating

Haber Default judgments are a part of litigation. In New York, a default judgment may be entered “ hen a defendant has failed to appear, plead or proceed However, the party against whom judgment is entered can seek to vacate the judgment, when he/she can , which if not done can result in vacatur of the order or judgment. Thereafter, Defendant filed an order to show cause to vacate the judgment.

Thereafter, plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the complaint. With the judgment unsatisfied, plaintiff filed suit on July 10, 2010. The Court held that the motion court incorrectly granted judgment on the DCL § 273-a claim. “Debtor & Creditor Law § 273-a contemplates that the two judgments it refers to — the docketed judgment and the final judgment — shall be substantially the same” and “Plaintiff's final judgment for $500,000

Supreme Court granted Nomura summary judgment dismissing the complaint. After several years of discovery, plaintiff and defendants moved for summary judgment. Relevant to the appeal, both parties sought summary judgment as to defendant’s personal liability under Supreme Court denied plaintiff’s motion to the extent it sought summary judgment on its claim for personal liability against defendant and denied defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment dismissing the

The plaintiff moved for summary judgment arguing, inter alia , that the subject contract is unenforceable The defendant cross-moved for summary judgment enforcing the contract.  [Eds. Here, the plaintiff demonstrated her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence defendant failed to meet his prima facie burden on that branch of his cross-motion which was for summary judgment

Summary judgment is a procedural device permitting a litigant to seek judgment without a trial in circumstances The rules related to motions for summary judgment can be found in CPLR 3212 .  its summary judgment procedure in 1921, summary judgment has proven a valuable, practical tool for resolving Similarly, a summary judgment motion should be made if possible and meritorious.   Therefore, summary judgment was not warranted ( see Cremosa Food Co., LLC v.

for damages related to the willful exaggeration.[5] Thereafter, the owner moved for partial summary judgment

The motion court denied plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the complaint and granted defendant ’s cross-motion for, inter alia, summary judgment dismissing the complaint. pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1), (5), and (7) to dismiss the complaint and pursuant to CPLR 3212 for summary judgment

The lender moved for summary judgement and the borrowers cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing

Supreme court denied purchaser’s motion for summary judgment seeking the return of the down payment and After seller interposed an answer, but before any discovery had taken place, seller moved for summary judgment Purchaser appealed supreme court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of seller. Accordingly, the Court found that supreme court should have denied seller’s motion for summary judgment

The motion court granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff’s claim that defendants estoppel precludes a party who assumed a certain position in a prior proceeding, and who secured a judgment discretion in the selection of a plan of action and allows them to rely on their good faith business judgment