Tudor Insurance v. Unithree Investment Corp.

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Fusco, J.), dated December 17, 2013, which *1260 granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the complaint and denied its cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The essential elements of a cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract are the existence of a contract, the plaintiff’s performance pursuant to the contract, the defendant’s breach of its contractual obligations, and damages resulting from the breach (see Legum v Russo, 133 AD3d 638, 639 [2015]). In support of its motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the complaint and denied the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.