From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zeitlan v. Hoffman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 1993
199 A.D.2d 499 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

December 27, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff, in his motion papers, established his entitlement to compensatory damages, and, in response to the motion, the appellants submitted the bare affirmation of an attorney who demonstrated no personal knowledge of the transactions which formed the bases of the plaintiff's various causes of action. The affirmation is without evidentiary value and thus unavailing (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 563; Romano v St. Vincent's Med. Ctr., 178 A.D.2d 467, 470).

The appellants' remaining contention is without merit. Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Zeitlan v. Hoffman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 27, 1993
199 A.D.2d 499 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Zeitlan v. Hoffman

Case Details

Full title:ADAM ZEITLAN, Respondent, v. JEFFREY HOFFMAN et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Dec 27, 1993

Citations

199 A.D.2d 499 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
608 N.Y.S.2d 103