Platzman v. American Totalisator Co.
Cases that cite this one
18 later published cases cite this decision.
- Queens Neurology, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co. (New York Supreme Court, Kings County 2024)
- Pastor v. August Aichhorn Ctr. for Adolescent Residential Care, Inc. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
- Anderson-Haider v. State (N.Y. Ct. Cl. 2010)
- Drooker v. South Nassau Communities Hospital (New York Supreme Court 1998)
- Rennie v. Barbarosa Transport, Ltd. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1989)
- In re the Estate of Katz (New York Surrogate's Court 1989)
- Grid Realty Corp. v. Gialousakis (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
- Bonghi v. Firstcent Shopping Center, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
- Discenza v. New York Racing Ass'n (Civil Court of the City of New York 1986)
- Marchi Jaffe Cohen Crystal Rosner & Katz v. All-Star Video Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Herman v. Malamed (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Schultz v. Boy Scouts of America, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1984)
- Centrone v. C. Schmidt & Sons, Inc. (New York Supreme Court 1982)
- Laurie Visual Etudes, Inc. v. Chesebrough-Pond's, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1981)
- Zuckerman v. City of New York (N.Y. 1980)
- Ferber v. Sterndent Corp. (N.Y. 1980)
- Ferber v. Sterndent Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
- Connell v. City of New York (Civil Court of the City of New York 1979)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
On plaintiffs appeal the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, on the memorandum at the Appellate Division.
On the appeal of American Totalisator Company, Inc., the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and summary judgment granted dismissing the complaint as to American Totalisator. In his motion papers plaintiff tendered no evidentiary proof in support of his conclusory assertions that American Totalisator dealt with him individually rather than only as an officer-employee representative of Taller & Cooper, that he individually otherwise had a legally cognizable interest in the alleged system as against American Totalisator, or indeed that his system was different from that disclosed in the 1964 patent which thereby became public knowledge. For plaintiff to succeed in opposing the motion for summary judgment he must come forward with a tender of admissible proof sufficient to require a trial of the material questions of fact on which he rests his claims. We agree with the dissenters at the Appellate Division that plaintiff failed to do this here.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
On defendant American Totalisator Company, Inc.’s, appeal: Order reversed, with costs, and summary judgment granted dismissing the complaint as to American Totalisator Company, Inc. Question certified answered in the negative.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.