AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

DAVID BODISHER, Respondent, v. JEANNE HOFMANN et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the defendants Jeanne Hofmann and Judy Wood, formerly known as Bodisher, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them is granted.

The defendants Jeanne Hofmann and Judy Wood, formerly known as Bodisher (hereinafter together the defendants), demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by presenting evidence that the plaintiff executed general releases in their favor which barred the instant action ( see CPLR 3211 [a] [5]). "A release will not be treated lightly, and will be set aside by a court only for duress, illegality, fraud, or mutual mistake" ( Shklovskiy v Khan, 273 AD2d 371, 372; see Mangini v McClurg, 24 NY2d 556, 563; Haynes v Garez, 304 AD2d 714, 715). In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Friends of Avalon Preparatory School v Ehrenfeld, 6 AD3d 658, 659). Accordingly, the defendants' motion for summary judgment should have been granted.

The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

BODISHER v. HOFMANN
(Apr 8, 2008)