190 A.D.2d 635

Profil Aluminio, S.A., Respondent, v Bank of New York, Appellant, et al., Defendants.

— Order, Supreme Court, County of New York (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered March 11, 1992, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants are not entitled to summary judgment if the record leaves " ’any doubt’ ” as to the nonexistence of the assignment on which the action is based (Henderson v City of New York, 178 AD2d 129, 130). While the conflicting affidavits of the parties may not raise a doubt, given plaintiff’s failure to produce a copy of the assignment, the document of the National Bank of Greece, defendant bank’s correspondent, mak*636ing apparent reference to the assignment, does. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Ross and Rubin, JJ.

Aluminio v. Bank of New York
190 A.D.2d 635

Case Details

Name
Aluminio v. Bank of New York
Decision Date
Feb 25, 1993
Citations

190 A.D.2d 635

Jurisdiction
New York

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!