From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Essex v. Anderer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 17, 1991
174 A.D.2d 647 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

June 17, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Upon review of the record, we find that the court properly denied the defendant's cross motion for summary judgment. A triable issue of fact exists as to whether he notarized a deed containing forged signatures resulting in a fraudulent conveyance of certain property upon which the plaintiff was induced to lend money. Mangano, P.J., Kooper, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Essex v. Anderer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 17, 1991
174 A.D.2d 647 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Essex v. Anderer

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT B. ESSEX, Respondent, v. JAMES ANDERER, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 17, 1991

Citations

174 A.D.2d 647 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
571 N.Y.S.2d 509

Citing Cases

Roman v. Bd. of Educatino of New York

notes: . . . where it appears that the instrumentality causing the injury could have been under the control…

Pannell v. Target Corp.

In the context of a retail store, some courts have held that store defendants do not have exclusive control…