From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Shapiro v. Prudential Theaters

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Nov 10, 1972
75 Misc. 2d 752 (N.Y. App. Term 1972)

Opinion

November 10, 1972

Appeal from the District Court of Nassau County, I. STANLEY ROSENTHAL, J.

William Gold for appellant.


Plaintiffs seek to recover moneys allegedly owed to them as winners of a contest and defendant has raised the affirmative defense that plaintiffs participated in an illegal transaction. The opposing papers indicate the existence of mixed questions of fact and law which should be resolved at a plenary trial.

Technical defects in plaintiffs' pleadings, if any, are unavailable to the moving defendant, for it is well settled that upon an application, summary judgment will be denied if the adversary shows facts sufficient to warrant a trial ( Curry v. Mackenzie, 239 N.Y. 267).

The order should be affirmed, without costs.

Concur — HOGAN, P.J., GLICKMAN and PITTONI, JJ.

Order affirmed, etc.


Summaries of

Shapiro v. Prudential Theaters

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Nov 10, 1972
75 Misc. 2d 752 (N.Y. App. Term 1972)
Case details for

Shapiro v. Prudential Theaters

Case Details

Full title:SIDNEY SHAPIRO et al., Respondents, v. PRUDENTIAL THEATERS, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Nov 10, 1972

Citations

75 Misc. 2d 752 (N.Y. App. Term 1972)
348 N.Y.S.2d 812

Citing Cases

Johnson v. N Y Daily News

Thus, in a prize-contest case, when the issue is one of compliance or noncompliance by the contestant, the…