Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996

Goldman v. Weingrad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided June 11, 1996

228 A.D.2d 240; 643 N.Y.2d 343; 643 N.Y.S.2d 343; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6456

Opinion of the Court

*241Defendants submitted documentary evidence establishing that plaintiff would be unable to establish any of the elements of a fraud cause of action (see, Zaref v Berk & Michaels, 192 AD2d 346, 348). The court’s order imposing sanctions on plaintiffs attorney in this action, for pursuing frivolous litigation satisfied the requirements of 22 NYCRR 130-1.2. We decline to impose a further sanction. Concur—Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Tom, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.