Opinion
April 18, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.).
The letter of credit at issue in this action was expressly to guarantee the plaintiff's participation in a tennis tournament. The letter did not, however, make such participation a condition for payment, although certain other conditions were established under "Special Instructions." Accordingly, the IAS Court properly concluded that the defendant was required to honor the letter when all actual conditions of that letter were satisfied (see, Fertico Belgium v. Phosphate Chems. Export Assn., 100 A.D.2d 165). There is no reason why the doctrine of independent contracts (see, First Commercial Bank v. Gotham Originals, 64 N.Y.2d 287) should not apply to stand-by letters of credit. That doctrine was appropriately applied by the IAS Court in this case. Defendant's opposition to plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment consisted solely of an affirmation of counsel containing no allegations of fact, and was therefore insufficient to sustain defendant's burden in opposing the summary judgment motion (see, Tobron Off. Furniture Corp. v. King World Prods., 161 A.D.2d 355).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Kupferman and Smith, JJ.