From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

B.R.I. Coverage Corp. v. Imperial

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 21, 1992
182 A.D.2d 529 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

April 21, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.).


The security agreement recited in the promissory notes gives plaintiff the option of retiring its loan to defendant by retaining commissions earned by defendant instead of accepting payment directly from him. Defendant asserts that such election was made, and that his earned commissions have been debited in an amount equal to full amount of both notes; plaintiff, by its secretary-treasurer, denies this. The security agreement requires written notice of the election, but the record is silent as to whether such written notice was given. The conflicting affidavits require denial of summary judgment.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

B.R.I. Coverage Corp. v. Imperial

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 21, 1992
182 A.D.2d 529 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

B.R.I. Coverage Corp. v. Imperial

Case Details

Full title:B.R.I. COVERAGE CORP., Appellant, v. ROGER IMPERIAL, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 21, 1992

Citations

182 A.D.2d 529 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
582 N.Y.S.2d 701

Citing Cases

Wesco Ins. Co. v. Moncrieffe

Given this conflicting evidence, plaintiffs have sufficiently raised a triable issue of fact with respect to…

John Galliano, S.A. v. Stallion, Inc.

Material issues of fact required the denial of summary judgment. ( St. Vincent's Hosp. Med. Ctr. v Nationwide…