ROBERT BERKLEY PHYSICAL THERAPY PLAINTIFF RESPONDENT v. APPEAL NO (2014)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

ROBERT BERKLEY PHYSICAL THERAPY, P.C., PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT, v. THE HISTORIC WOODRUFF BLOCK, LLC, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

CA 13–01149

Decided: February 14, 2014

PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, CARNI, VALENTINO, AND WHALEN, JJ.

RICHARD PALMA, NEW YORK CITY, FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. BOND, SCHOENECK & KING, PLLC, OSWEGO (SCOTT J. DELCONTE OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF–RESPONDENT.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order and judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that a contract was never formed based on lack or failure of consideration, and thus that Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and entering judgment in plaintiff's favor. That contention is raised for the first time on appeal and thus is not properly before us (see Ciesinski v. Town of Aurora, 202 A.D.2d 984, 985).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go to Learn About the Law