From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Metlab Corporation v. Marine Midland Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 1991
177 A.D.2d 956 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

November 15, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Niagara County, Mintz, J.

Present — Doerr, J.P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff failed to meet its initial burden of showing entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law (see, Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 N.Y.2d 1065, 1067). First, as Special Term correctly found, plaintiff seeks summary judgment based on its contract with defendant, but that contract is not in the record. Second, although plaintiff's theory in its complaint is that defendant paid on the letter of credit for the benefit of a transferee without proper documentation of transfer by the beneficiary, defendant's telex in the record states that payment was made for the benefit of the named beneficiary.


Summaries of

Metlab Corporation v. Marine Midland Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 15, 1991
177 A.D.2d 956 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Metlab Corporation v. Marine Midland Bank

Case Details

Full title:METLAB CORPORATION, Appellant, v. MARINE MIDLAND BANK, N.A., Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 15, 1991

Citations

177 A.D.2d 956 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
577 N.Y.S.2d 999