Coronel v Chase Manhattan Bank
2007 NY Slip Op 00231 [8 NY3d 838]
January 16, 2007
Court of Appeals
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, March 21, 2007


[*1]
Victor Coronel, Appellant,
v
The Chase Manhattan Bank, Respondent.

Decided January 16, 2007

Coronel v Chase Manhattan Bank, 19 AD3d 310, affirmed.

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

Victor Coronel, appellant pro se.

Barry, McTiernan & Moore, New York City (Anthony J. McNulty of counsel), for respondent.

{**8 NY3d at 839}OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question not answered as unnecessary. We agree with the Appellate Division that plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact sufficient to defeat defendant bank's summary judgment motion.

Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith and Pigott.