Opinion
June 14, 2001.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered on or about February 1, 2001, which, in an action to recover monies allegedly misdirected in derogation of an irrevocable directive, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Lynn Armentrout, for plaintiff-appellant.
Marvin D. Fuhrman, for defendants-respondents.
Before: Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Ellerin, Buckley, Marlow, JJ.
Plaintiff's motion was properly denied on this record, which raises more questions than it answers (see, Kudlack v. Landmark Realty Co., 115 A.D.2d 842, 844), and leaves substantial room for doubt as to the merits of plaintiff's claim of entitlement to the funds at issue (see,Millerman v. Georgia Pac. Corp., 214 A.D.2d 362, 363). Even if we were to find reason to disregard all of the statements submitted by the non-party former client of defendant law firm, the denial of summary judgment would still be proper, since plaintiff failed to sustain his initial burden of showing an absence of questions of fact (see, Vasquez v. City of New York, 210 A.D.2d 156).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Motion seeking leave to strike portions of the record and for other related relief denied.