The only objections that plaintiff raised in opposition to defendant's motion for summary judgment and pursues on this appeal were defendant's valuations of the partnership's lease and office furnishings. These objections were not supported by evidence showing, prima facie, that defendant's accounting of these items was inaccurate or incomplete. Accordingly, the burden of coming forward with countervailing evidence never shifted to defendant (see Matter of Schnare,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
SCHULMAN v. LEVY
302 A.D.2d 321 (2003)
754 N.Y.S.2d 876
STEPHEN B. SCHULMAN, Appellant, v. LEVY, SONET & SIEGEL, Respondent.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided February 27, 2003.
Decided February 27, 2003.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.