From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Capital Investment Company v. Cuffee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 7, 1998
256 A.D.2d 295 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 7, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The appellant does not contest that he defaulted in the repayment of the subject loan. Moreover, the plaintiff presented evidentiary proof in admissible form which established its cause of action for foreclosure against the appellant, based upon the appellant's indebtedness of $175,630.38 plus interest, various taxes, and expenses ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 559). The appellant's answer to the complaint and the affidavit submitted in opposition to the motion contained unsubstantiated allegations ( see, Rukaj v. Roth, 237 A.D.2d 503), and failed to demonstrate the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial of the action ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, supra).

O'Brien, J. P., Florio, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Capital Investment Company v. Cuffee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 7, 1998
256 A.D.2d 295 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Capital Investment Company v. Cuffee

Case Details

Full title:CAPITAL INVESTMENT COMPANY, Respondent, v. JAMES E. CUFFEE, Also Known as…

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

Date published: Dec 7, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 295 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
681 N.Y.S.2d 760

Citing Cases

Browne v. Stanley

The Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. The parties do not dispute…