From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lindsay v. Potter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 13, 1990
163 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 13, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Patlow, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Doerr, Boomer, Lawton and Davis, JJ.


Order and judgment unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Summary judgment was improperly granted to defendant Cane, doing business as Lexington Avenue Inn. To prevail on a motion for summary judgment, defendant must establish his defense "sufficiently to warrant the court as a matter of law in directing judgment" in his favor (CPLR 3212 [b]; Iselin Co. v. Mann Judd Landau, 71 N.Y.2d 420, 425). Upon review of the record, we find that defendant Cane failed to establish, as a matter of law, that a prohibited sale of alcoholic beverages was not made to defendant Potter in the Lexington Avenue Inn on December 15, 1985 (see, Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 [former (2)]).


Summaries of

Lindsay v. Potter

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 13, 1990
163 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Lindsay v. Potter

Case Details

Full title:DOUGLAS J. LINDSAY et al., Plaintiffs, v. STEVEN I. POTTER, Defendant…

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

Date published: Jul 13, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 870 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
559 N.Y.S.2d 835

Citing Cases

Walsh-Jones Agency, Inc. v. Rutecki

A shareholder may not sue in an individual capacity for a wrong committed against a corporation (see, Abrams…

McGowan v. Villa Maria College

The court erred in granting the motion. "A defendant moving for summary judgment has the initial burden of…