Case Name: Hollis M. Hite, Respondent, v. James N. Hite et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1990-11-16
Citations: 167 A.D.2d 953
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hollis M. Hite, Respondent, v James N. Hite et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 167
Pages: 953–953

Head Matter:
Hollis M. Hite, Respondent, v James N. Hite et al., Appellants.

Opinion:
Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the trial court erred in granting plaintiff summary judgment. We agree. Accepting, as we must for the purposes of this motion, the nonmoving party's evidence as true (see, Hourigan v McGarry, 106 AD2d 845), summary judgment must be denied because there is at least arguably an issue of fact regarding the existence of the partnership (see, Missan v Schoenfeld, 95 AD2d 198). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, J.—dissolution of partnership.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.