[*1]
Citibank (S.D.), N.A. v Rhem
2004 NY Slip Op 51072(U)
Decided on September 22, 2004
Appellate Term, Second Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.


Decided on September 22, 2004
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM : 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT: McCABE, P.J., COVELLO and TANENBAUM, JJ.
——————————————————————————————————————————————-x

CITIBANK (SOUTH DAKOTA), N.A., Appellant, — NO. 2004-113 N C DECIDED

against

MERNELLE RHEM, Respondent. ——————————————————————————————————————————————-x


Appeal by plaintiff from an order of the District Court, Nassau County


(H. Miller, J.), entered on June 2, 2003, denying its motion for summary judgment.

Order unanimously reversed without costs and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment granted in the amount of $5,707.16.

The affirmation by plaintiff's management specialist, together with the supporting documents evidencing the account stated, were sufficient to warrant granting the motion for summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. Whereas an account stated is
independent of the original obligation, it was not necessary for plaintiff to set forth the subject matter of the charges to the underlying credit card account (see Schutz v Morette, 146 NY 137 [1895]). [*2]
Decision Date: September 22, 2004