From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hornell Brewing Co., v. High Grade Beverage

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 16, 2000
276 A.D.2d 593 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued September 26, 2000.

October 16, 2000.

In an action, inter alia, to recover on an account stated, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Joseph, J.), entered September 3, 1999, which granted the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on its second and third causes of action, and (2) a judgment of the same court, entered September 16, 1999, which is in favor of the plaintiff and against it in the principal sum of $260,110. The defendant's notice of appeal from the order is also deemed to be a notice of appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501[c]).

Robert P. Lynn, Jr., LLC, Mineola, N.Y. (John W. Dunne of counsel), for appellant.

Canfield, Madden, Rossi, Ruggiero Crowley, LLP, Douglaston, N Y (John P. Ruggiero of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., ANITA R. FLORIO, HOWARD MILLER, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the appeal from the order is dismissed; and it is further,

ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, the order is vacated, and the plaintiff's motion is denied; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs.

The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see, Matter of Aho, 39 N.Y.2d 241, 248). The issues raised on appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see, CPLR 5501[a][1]).

In opposition to the plaintiff's prima facie case for partial summary judgment, the defendant submitted evidence of timely oral and written objections to the account rendered. Under the circumstances, the Supreme Court erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that the plaintiff had established an account stated for which summary judgment could be granted (see, Dynaforce v. Bruno GMC Truck Sales Corp., 223 A.D.2d 618; Construction Mar. Equip. Co. v. Crimmins Contr. Co., 195 A.D.2d 535; Sandvoss v. Dunkelberger, 112 A.D.2d 278).


Summaries of

Hornell Brewing Co., v. High Grade Beverage

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 16, 2000
276 A.D.2d 593 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Hornell Brewing Co., v. High Grade Beverage

Case Details

Full title:HORNELL BREWING CO., INC., D/B/A FEROLITO, VULTAGGIO SONS, RESPONDENT, v…

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

Date published: Oct 16, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 593 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
714 N.Y.S.2d 901

Citing Cases

Elmo Manufacturing Corp. v. American Innovations, Inc.

h contained evidence explaining and supplementing the written documents of the parties and supporting the…

Danica Plumbing Heating LLC v. Amoco Constr. Corp.

Lastly, the court denies plaintiff summary judgment on its cause of action for an alleged account stated…