Case Name: Suburban Pontiac, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. General Motors Corp., Respondent, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1983-03-22
Citations: 58 N.Y.2d 987
Docket Number: 
Parties: Suburban Pontiac, Inc., et al., Appellants, v General Motors Corp., Respondent, et al., Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 987–990

Head Matter:
Suburban Pontiac, Inc., et al., Appellants, v General Motors Corp., Respondent, et al., Defendant.
Argued February 7, 1983;
decided March 22, 1983
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Michael J. Ricigliano, John F. Principe and David J. Sutton for appellants.
Guy Miller Struve, Mary Anne Wirth, D. Scott Wise and Peter D. Kolbrener for respondents.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs. The factual determinations of the Appellate Division more nearly conform to the weight of the evidence, and there was no error of law in its declaration that General Motors had validly exercised its right to terminate the dealership agreement or in its decision that the complaint should otherwise be dismissed.
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg, Meyer and Simons.