From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bourgeois v. Celentano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 12, 1960
10 A.D.2d 824 (N.Y. App. Div. 1960)

Opinion

April 12, 1960


Order granting summary judgment to defendants and the judgment entered thereon, unanimously affirmed, with costs to respondents. In granting summary judgment, Special Term excluded from consideration the averments in the affidavits which, in the absence of a waiver, would have been inadmissible on a trial because of the provisions of section 347 of the Civil Practice Act. This court has, however, examined and weighed all of the affidavits including statements of facts and circumstances of transactions with the decedent, and from the entire record has concluded that there is no triable issue and the plaintiff's claim lacks merit. This court's view is that on a motion for summary judgment matter which might be excluded on a trial pursuant to section 347 of the Civil Practice Act may nevertheless be considered in determining whether a triable issue exists to defeat the motion (see, contra, Ditkoff v. Prudential Sav. Bank, 245 App. Div. 748 [2d Dept., 1935]).

Concur — Breitel, J.P., Rabin, M.M. Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ.


Summaries of

Bourgeois v. Celentano

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 12, 1960
10 A.D.2d 824 (N.Y. App. Div. 1960)
Case details for

Bourgeois v. Celentano

Case Details

Full title:PIERRE BOURGEOIS, Appellant, v. FRANK A. CELENTANO et al., as Executors of…

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

Date published: Apr 12, 1960

Citations

10 A.D.2d 824 (N.Y. App. Div. 1960)

Citing Cases

Phillips v. Joseph Kantor Company

Order, Supreme Court, New York County entered December 1, 1971, granting summary judgment to defendants…

Tichonchuk v. Orloff

1 N.Y.2d 735; see, also, Freygang v. Train, 42 Misc. 49.) However, evidence which may be excluded upon the…