Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Canter v. Mulnick 60 N.Y.2d 689

← Cases

Canter v. Mulnick

60 N.Y.2d 689 Court N.Y. Decision date 1983-09-29 English

Contents

Majority

p. 689
Jack Canter et al., Appellants, v Norman Mulnick, Respondent.
Decided September 29, 1983
p. 691
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Jacob Rabinowitz for appellants.
Nathan Cyperstein for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

The Appellate Division correctly held that the plaintiffs’ affidavit failed to establish the merit of their case, and that the motion to dismiss should have been granted unconditionally (see Stolowitz u Mount Sinai Hosp., 60 NY2d 685 ).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer and Simons concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [g]), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cases cited