Case Name: Erwin Pearl, Inc., Appellant, v. Burroughs Corporation, Respondent, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1984-07-02
Citations: 62 N.Y.2d 1031
Docket Number: 
Parties: Erwin Pearl, Inc., Appellant, v Burroughs Corporation, Respondent, et al., Defendant.
Judges: Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 62
Pages: 1031–1032

Head Matter:
Erwin Pearl, Inc., Appellant, v Burroughs Corporation, Respondent, et al., Defendant.
Decided July 2, 1984
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Milton Garwitz and Daniel Markewich for appellant.
Joseph P. Zammit for respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (98 AD2d 619). We would add only that plaintiff's affidavit on its motion to reargue failed to establish the merit of its case (see Canter v Mulnick, 60 NY2d 689).
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Meyer, Simons and Kaye.