Robert Prignoli, Staten Island, NY, for appellant.
Raven & Kolbe, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Michael T. Gleason of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion
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 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 A.D.3d 638, 639, 20 N.Y.S.3d 124). 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 N.Y.2d 320, 324,
508 N.Y.S.2d 923,
501 N.E.2d 572). In opposition, the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact (
see
Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562,
427 N.Y.S.2d 595,
404 N.E.2d 718). 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.
HALL, J.P., AUSTIN, SGROI and LaSALLE, JJ., concur.