Majority
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered December 1, 2009, which, to the extent appealed from, denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on its causes of action for account stated, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion granted as to each such claim against defendants. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Defendants’ statements that they made oral protests about the invoices in question during various meetings with plaintiff
Although no cause of action for account stated is pleaded against R&R in the complaint, this omission is not a bar to summary judgment because we find that the evidence necessary to substantiate the claim is in the record. Further, plaintiff made the argument to the motion court and defendants have not been prejudiced (see Weinstock v Handler, 254 AD2d 165 , 166 [1998]). Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Saxe, Nardelli, McGuire and Moskowitz, JJ. [Prior Case History: 2009 NY Slip Op 32793 (U).]
Cases cited
- Morris v. Astor Holdings Inc. 61 AD3d 418 at 419 p. 605
- Zanani v. Schvimmer 50 AD3d 445 p. 605
- Miller v. Nadler 60 AD3d 499 at 500 p. 605
- Sisters of Charity Hospital v. Riley 231 AD2d 272 at 282-283 p. 605
- Weinstock v. Handler 254 AD2d 165 at 166 p. 605