N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 3212

A summary judgment cross motion permits the court to search the record and grant relief to a nonmoving party.

Colbert v. Metropolitan Property & Liability Insurance · filed 1992-12-17(b)

Although defendant did not move for summary judgment, plaintiff’s cross motion searches the record (CPLR 3212 [b]); therefore, it is within our power to grant relief to a nonmoving party (see, Sky Four Realty Co. v C.F.M. Enters., 128 AD2d 1011, 1013).

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to search the record and award judgment to a nonmoving party when appropriate.

Jacobs v. Northeastern Industrial Park, Inc. · filed 1992-03-09(b)

We also note that pursuant to CPLR 3212 (b), a court is empowered, upon a motion for summary judgment, to search the record and award judgment where appropriate, even to a nonmoving party (see, Grimaldi v Pagan, 135 AD2d 496; see also, Coleman v Village of Head of Harbor, 163 AD2d 456, 458). Therefore, summary judgment was properly granted to Francesco Galesi.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party without a formal cross motion, including on appeal.

Alpargatas, S. A. v. Century Business Credit Corp. · filed 1992-05-14(b)

Defendant is entitled to summary judgment, even absent a formal cross motion to that effect (CPLR 3212 [b]; Flaks, Zaslow & Co. v Bank Computer Network Corp., 66 AD2d 363). A non-moving party may be granted such relief even on appeal (Merritt Hill Vineyards v Windy Hgts. Vineyard, 61 NY2d 106).

Section 3212(b) permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to search the record and grant judgment to a nonmoving party.

Holman v. Transamerica Insurance · filed 1992-05-21(b)

In denying plaintiffs’ motion for declaratory relief, the IAS court additionally searched the record and declared judgment in favor of the nonmoving Transamerica. Such sua sponte action by the court is authorized under the statute (CPLR 3212 [b]; see, Merritt Hill Vineyards v Windy Hgts. Vineyard, 61 NY2d 106), and the IAS court’s decision was a proper exercise of that discretion (Sky Four Realty Co. v C.F.M. Enters., 128 AD2d 1011, 1013).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to dismiss a counterclaim on summary judgment even when the moving party did not request that relief.

Coleman v. Smith · filed 1991-07-18(b)

Lastly, because Smith’s counterclaim for malicious prosecution is premature (see, Laval Realty v Shell Realty Co., 151 AD2d 321, 322), it was properly dismissed by Supreme Court notwithstanding that plaintiff failed to request such relief in her motion for summary judgment (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; County of Broome v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 146 AD2d 337, 340, n 2, lv denied 74 NY2d 614).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to award summary judgment to a party that has not filed a cross motion.

Leather's Best, Inc. v. Argentinas · filed 1986-03-13(b)

Defendant’s motion is denied, and, despite the absence of a cross motion, plaintiffs may have summary judgment and an assessment of damages pursuant to CPLR 3212 (b).

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to search the record on a summary judgment motion and award judgment to a nonmoving party when appropriate.

deBrossard v. Van Norden · filed 1985-11-19(b)

Since, as both parties concede, no issue of fact exists and inasmuch as "[a] motion for summary judgment, irrespective of by whom made, invites a court, even on appeal, to search the record and to award judgment where appropriate” (Fertico Belgium v Phosphate Chems. Export Assn., 100 AD2d 165, 171; see, CPLR 3212 [b]), we direct the entry of judgment in plaintiff’s favor in the sum of $241,667, notwithstanding his failure to move for such relief.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a party who did not move for it when no issues of fact remain.

Nantista v. 130 West 86 Apartments Corp. · filed 1985-12-12(b)

Since there are no issues of fact presented, summary judgment is granted to plaintiff, despite her failure to move therefor, in the amount of $7,504 with interest from March 22, 1985 (CPLR 3212 [b]), and the clerk may enter judgment accordingly.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to nonappealing defendants on causes of action resolved in favor of the appealing defendants.

McDaniel v. Clarkstown Central School District No. 1 · filed 1985-05-06(b)

We now modify the order of Special Term, so as to grant these motions as to the first three causes of action and, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (b), we grant summary judgment on those causes of action in favor of the nonappealing defendants as well (see, Maddox v City of New York, 108 AD2d 42).

CPLR 3212(b) authorizes a court to grant summary judgment to the opposing party when the facts warrant it.

Erlwein v. Patchogue Homes Corp. · filed 1964-06-29(b)

Plaintiff’s motion is denied, and upon the facts as found and the authority granted by CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) summary judgment is granted in favor of defendants.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for the opposing defendant when a complete statute of limitations defense bars the claim.

First National City Bank v. Cervera · filed 1964-08-28(b)

The plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied and under CPLR 3212 (.suibd. [b]) summary judgment is awarded defendant William Cervera dismissing the complaint herein.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the party that did not move for it.

Jacobs v. Ford Instrument Co. Division of Sperry Rand Corp. · filed 1965-07-12(b)

In an action to recover damages arising out of the allegedly wrongful discharge of plaintiff by the defendant employer, the latter appeals from a resettled order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered February 11, 1965, which: (a) granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (CPLR 3212); (b) directed an assessment of the damages; and (c) failed to grant summary judgment in favor of the defendant (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]). Order reversed, without costs; plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied; summary judgment dismissing the complaint directed in favor of the defendant, and complaint dismissed, without costs.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for the opposing party when no triable issue of fact remains.

McConville, Inc. v. Merchants Mutual Insurance · filed 1965-08-04(b)

In view of the above and under the authority set forth in CPLR 3212, subdivision (b), this court holds that summary judgment be granted to the defendant since there is no triable issue of fact presented by the plaintiff which should be resolved on a trial.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment in favor of a party who has not made a cross motion.

Wiseman v. Knaus · filed 1965-11-01(b)

Accordingly, as to her, the defendant is entitled to summary judgment in his favor even in the absence of a cross motion for such relief (CPLR 3212, subd, [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the opposing party when the moving party's claim fails as a matter of law.

Rosalia v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. · filed 1965-12-14(b)

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied, and in accordance with CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]), summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted to the defendant.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party without a cross-motion when that party is entitled to judgment.

Locust Club v. City of Rochester · filed 1965-12-30(b)

Under CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]): “If it shall appear that any party other than the moving party is entitled to a summary judgment, the court may grant such judgment without the necessity of a cross-motion.”

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party when that party is entitled to it.

Jelinek v. City of New York · filed 1966-01-25(b)

The court may, however, grant such motion if upon a motion for summary judgment it appears that “ any party other than the moving party is entitled to a summary judgment”.

Section 3212(b) permits the court to grant summary judgment dismissing a complaint on the merits when it denies the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

Hacker v. Common Council · filed 1966-01-31(b)

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment should be denied. Summary judgment dismissing the complaint upon the merits should be granted (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a defendant and dismiss the complaint when the plaintiff’s motion shows the claim cannot be maintained.

Wa-Wa-Yanda, Inc. v. Town of Islip · filed 1966-04-04(b)

Hence, it is clear that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, that plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment should have been denied and that the complaint should have been dismissed pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]).

Subdivision (b) permits the court to treat a dismissal request as a cross motion for summary judgment and consider a legal issue raised in the affidavits without amending the complaint.

Stonedge Estates, Inc. v. City of New York · filed 1965-05-26(b)

In view of the fact that the motion by plaintiff is a motion for summary judgment and the defendants move for a dismissal of the complaint and in effect a cross motion for summary judgment pursuant to the provisions of CPLR 3212, subd. (b), the court believes that there is no need for amendment of the complaint and considers the affidavits sufficient to raise the legal issue of whether section 36 of the General City Law applies.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to defendants even when they have made no cross motion.

Collins v. Sweeney · filed 1965-07-08(b)

Motion by the plaintiffs for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 is denied. Although a cross motion for summary judgment has not been made, summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) as to all defendants.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a defendant who has not made a cross motion.

De Iorio v. County of Suffolk · filed 1965-11-23(b)

Motion for summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs is denied; summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendants dismissing the complaint, as authorized by CPLR 3212, subd. (b), even though there be no cross motion for such relief.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to defendants who did not specifically move for it.

Kaminsky v. Abrams · filed 1965-09-30(b)

Since the court is convinced that there is no merit to the first cause of action, summary judgment is accordingly granted dismissing it, as to all defendants, although not specifically moved for.

CPLR 3212(b) and (e) allow a court to grant partial summary judgment to the opposing party, dismissing a cause of action on the movant’s motion.

Pollack v. Macombs Inwood Corp. · filed 1966-11-30(b), (e)

For the reasons set forth heroin, the motion for summary judgment with respect to the second cause of action is disposed of to the extent that judgment is granted to defendants dismissing the second cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subds. [b] and [e]).

Section 3212(b) allows a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party without a cross motion, but leaves that decision to the court’s discretion.

Morton Motors, Inc. v. Incorporated Village of Thomaston · filed 1966-06-10(b)

Defendant made no cross motion, however, and the granting of summary judgment to defendant is, therefore, discretionary (compare the last sentence of CPLR 3212 [subd. (b)] with the third sentence of that subdivision).

Subdivision (b) permits summary judgment for the nonmoving party when the undisputed facts establish that party’s entitlement to judgment.

Fadden v. Cambridge Mutual Fire Insurance · filed 1966-09-05(b)

Defendant’s motion is denied and summary judgment is directed in favor of plaintiff against defendant for the relief demanded in the complaint (see CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a party that did not request it when undisputed facts establish a defense.

Manhattan Gear & Instrument Co. v. 2350 Linden Blvd. Corp. · filed 1966-12-27(b)

Since the material facts are undisputed and establish that defendants have a good defense to the action, summary judgment dismissing the complaint should be granted, even though defendants did not ask for that relief at Special Term (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]; De Rosa v. Slattery Contr. Co., 14 A D 2d 278, affd. 12 N Y 2d 735).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party without a cross motion when that party is entitled to judgment.

Blatz v. Benschine · filed 1967-04-04(b)

Summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendant dismissing the action for lack of jurisdiction over his person. The last sentence of CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) permits the court to grant such judgment without the necessity of a cross motion where, as here, it appears that any party other than the moving party is entitled to summary judgment.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment without a cross motion when proper.

Gerken v. Estate of Bertram · filed 1966-08-24(b)

Plaintiff now moves for summary judgment. There is no cross motion. However, CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) permits the court to grant such summary judgment as may be proper without the necessity of a cross motion.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the opposing party on an issue raised by the motion.

Waterman v. Mayor of Oneida · filed 1967-06-21(b)

In all other respects it should be denied and defendants should be granted summary judgment dismissing on the merits that part of the first cause of action which in effect requests the city be restrained from shutting off the water supply to the Schenandoah residence located on the Oneida Indian Reservation for nonpayment of the annual water assessment of $48. (CPLR 3212, subd. [b].)

Section 3212(a) permits a party to move for summary judgment after issue has been joined, even if depositions or examinations before trial have not occurred.

Bone v. Gambucci · filed 1967-07-27(a)

Any party may move for summary judgment after issue has been joined (CPLR 3212, subd. [a]) whether or not depositions were taken or examinations before trial were had.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party without a cross motion.

Klein v. Compania Azucarera Vertientes-Camaguey de Cuba · filed 1967-10-03(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) provides, in part: “ If it shall appear that any party other than the moving party is entitled to a summary judgment, the court may grant such judgment without the necessity of a cross-motion.” Thereby, the formality of a cross motion is dispensed with.

A plaintiff opposing summary judgment must submit an affidavit with evidentiary facts showing a factual issue that requires trial.

Galumbeck v. E. J. Korvette, Inc. · filed 1967-11-09(b)

In resisting a motion for summary judgment a plaintiff must, by affidavit, disclose evidentiary facts sufficient to enable the court to determine that there are questions of fact in regard to plaintiff’s cause of action which would require disposition after plenary trial and that defendant is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Section 3212(b) requires an affirmation opposing summary judgment to allege facts from someone with personal knowledge.

Commercial Insurance Co. of Newark v. Scalamandre · filed 1967-12-05(b)

Aside from the fact that such proof could not be received under the complaint in its present form, the affirmation of the attorney is not sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment. Such an affirmation or affidavit must allege facts and be made by a person having knowledge of the facts.

Section 3212 requires a party opposing a properly supported summary judgment motion to present evidentiary facts; pleading allegations alone do not suffice.

Indig v. Finkelstein · filed 1968-03-12

Consequently, it is well settled that the allegations contained in pleadings are not acceptable as the evidential proof required to defeat a summary judgment application.

Section 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present specific evidentiary facts showing an issue that requires a trial; conclusory allegations are insufficient.

Hanson v. Ontario Milk Producers Cooperative, Inc. · filed 1968-10-07

The plaintiff cannot defeat this motion by general conclusory allegations which contain no specific factual references.

Section 3212(b) allows a court to award summary judgment to a party other than the moving party.

Leigh v. Estate of Leigh · filed 1967-11-28(b)

Since we may award summary judgment to a party other than the moving party (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]) plaintiff may have judgment directing that the determination for the payment of benefits made by the New York Telephone Company through its benefit committee is annulled and that the company proceed to determine the matter in accordance with the terms of the plan.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the nonmoving party when the facts before it show that party is entitled to judgment.

Tow v. Maidman · filed 1968-02-08(b)

The plaintiffs are not entitled to summary judgment. Having invoked the remedy and the facts having been made available to the court, it is apparent that the defendant is entitled to summary judgment ( CPLR 3212, subd. [b]) and the complaint is dismissed.

Section 3212 permits partial summary judgment for a nonmoving party on liability, leaving damages for trial.

Annutto v. Town of Herkimer · filed 1968-02-26(b), (g)

The plaintiffs make no motions. Plaintiffs are granted partial summary judgment on the issue of liability against defendant village. Trial is directed solely on the question of damages. (CPLR 3212, subds. [b] and [g].)

Section 3212(b) permits the court to grant summary judgment to defendants on a plaintiff’s motion when the defendants have a valid defense.

Mareno v. Kibbe · filed 1968-03-22(b)

Plaintiffs’ motion is therefore considered one for summary judgment CPLR 3211 (subd. [c]) and summary judgment is granted to defendants CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]), dismissing the first, second and third causes of action, with costs.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a party that has not cross moved for relief.

Beneficial Finance Co. v. Kurland Cadillac-Oldsmobile, Inc. · filed 1968-09-11(b)

Inasmuch as the financing statement upon which plaintiff bases its claim for conversion is ineffectual as to the defendant, who is not claimed to have had actual notice thereof, defendant is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint notwithstanding its failure to cross move for such relief (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) requires a party opposing summary judgment to present evidentiary facts that rebut the movant’s showing and raise a triable issue.

Bernstein v. Friedlander · filed 1968-12-20(b)

It was incumbent upon the defendant G-iloni to submit evidentiary facts rebutting the prima facie showing of authorization and demonstrating the existence of a triable issue of the ultimate fact (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]; Shapiro v. Health Ins. Plan, 7 N Y 2d 56, 63).

Section 3212(b) permits a party who did not make the original motion to seek summary judgment without a cross motion.

Bagley v. Butler · filed 1969-02-25(b)

Defendants submitted their affidavit, and that of their attorney, in opposition and, additionally, ask for summary judgment, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]). Said section permits a party other than the original moving party to seek the relief without the necessity of a cross motion.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment on the merits to the party opposing a summary judgment motion.

Filetto v. St. Mary of the Assumption Church · filed 1969-11-19(b)

Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment should be denied and summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the merits should be granted defendants. (CPLR 3212, subd. [b].)

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party without a cross motion.

Cutting Room Appliances Corp. v. Finkelstein · filed 1969-11-20(b)

On a motion for summary judgment, the court may grant such judgment to a party other than the moving party without the necessity of a cross motion. (CPLR 3212, subd. [b].)

Section 3212(b) permits a court to search the record and grant summary judgment to the nonmoving party.

Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · filed 1970-03-04(b)

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied and on the motion of the court, after examining all the papers herein, and searching the record, summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendant under CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to grant judgment to defendants who did not move for it when the record shows they have no liability.

Davis v. Shelton · filed 1969-11-06(b)

Although the defendants Shelton and Guinane, scout master and assistant scout master respectively, did not ask for summary judgment at Special Term and did not participate in this appeal, the record clearly demonstrates no liability on their part. Having jurisdiction to determine this motion, this court, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]), accordingly modifies the orders to direct summary judgment for the defendants Shelton and Guinane, and dismisses the complaint as to them.

Section 3212(b) permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to grant judgment to parties who did not move for it.

Location Auto Leasing Corp. v. Lembo Corp. · filed 1970-04-22(b)

As to the Frigianos and Michigan Mutual, the action is, however, dismissed pursuant to the authority granted by CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party even without a cross motion.

22 West Main Street, Inc. v. Boguszewski · filed 1970-06-25(b)

Even in the absence of a cross motion, the court should have granted summary judgment to the defendant (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court deciding a plaintiff’s summary judgment motion to grant summary judgment to the defendant.

Janitor Service Management Co. v. Provo · filed 1970-06-30(b)

Special Term correctly denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and we further determine that summary judgment should be entered dismissing plaintiff’s complaint. (CPLR 3212, subd. [b].)

CPLR 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to submit evidence raising a factual issue; otherwise, the motion must be granted.

In re the Estate of Basile · filed 1970-08-11

On this motion for summary judgment if contestant had any evidence which would raise issues of fact it should have been submitted, otherwise the motion for summary judgment must be granted. (CPLR 3212.) ... Contestant has submitted no evidence sufficient to raise any issue of fact concerning execution or testamentary capacity. ... Accordingly the motion for partial summary judgment dismissing objections First and Second is granted.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to award summary judgment to the opposing party when that party is entitled to it.

Lionel Freedman, Inc. v. Glens Falls Insurance · filed 1971-01-07(b)

Inasmuch as our decision that the insurer is not obligated to defend could be reached only after a determination of no coverage, we conclude that summary judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety should have been awarded to defendant (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212 gives a court discretion to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party.

Accredited Demolition Construction Corp. v. City of Yonkers · filed 1971-07-06

Under CPLR 3212 the court is given discretion in granting summary judgment to a nonmoving party. Thus, it appears that the Special Term was acting within this discretion when it did not pass upon defendant’s informal motion.

A party opposing summary judgment must offer more than denials and assertions that triable issues exist.

Rae v. Rosenberg · filed 1971-09-07

On a motion for summary judgment more is required than disputation, denials and assertions that triable issues exist (Steingart Assoc. v. Sandler, 28 A D 2d 801, 803; see, also, Holdridge v. Town of Burlington, 32 A D 2d 581).

Section 3212 permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to search the record and dismiss affirmative defenses.

Buholtz v. Rochester Telephone Corp. · filed 1971-03-19(b), (e)

A motion for summary judgment searches the record (CPLR 3212, subds. [b], [e]). Accordingly, both affirmative defenses contained in defendant’s-answer are dismissed.

Section 3212(b) permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to search the record and grant judgment to the opposing party when no factual issues remain.

Harris v. Jacobs · filed 1972-02-01(b)

Since a motion for summary judgment searches the record (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]) and since all parties have agreed -that no factual issues are in dispute, summary judgment is granted in favor of defendants and the complaint is dismissed.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party who did not request it when no factual issue remains.

Freedom Discount Corp. v. McMahon · filed 1972-03-13(b)

Consequently, defendant is entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint and, in light of the concession that no fact issue exists on this record, he can and should be granted that relief despite his failure to request it (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]; Wiseman v. Knaus, 24 A D 2d 869).

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to an opposing party entitled to judgment as a matter of law, even if that party did not request it.

Arrow Builders Supply Corp. v. Public Service Mutual Insurance · filed 1972-05-11(b)

The defendant’s opposing affidavit requested the court at Special Term to grant defendant summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]). This request was not passed upon by the lower court. Even where the opposing party does not request summary judgment, the court in its discretion may nevertheless grant the relief if the opposing party is entitled to the relief as a matter of law.

Section 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to offer evidentiary facts rather than rely on conclusory allegations in the complaint.

Steak Bit of Westbury, Inc. v. Newsday, Inc. · filed 1972-06-22

To defeat defendants’ motion for summary judgment, Lollypop must do more than rely upon conclusory allegations in the. complaint. ... No such proof has been submitted.

A motion under CPLR 3212(b) searches the record, allowing the court to award summary judgment to a party that did not move for it.

238 East 34th Street Corp. v. Continental Insurance · filed 1972-12-20(b)

Since a motion under CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) searches the record, summary judgment is awarded to the third-party defendant, and the third-party complaint dismissed and judgment may be entered accordingly.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for the defendant on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

Procaccino v. Board of Elections · filed 1973-03-05(b)

In this action for a declaratory judgment declaring section 131-a of the Election Law unconstitutional as violative of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and of section 1 of article I and section 1 of article II of the New York State Constitution, plaintiff moves for an order granting him summary judgment pursuant to CPLB 3212. ... Accordingly, pursuant to subdivision (b) of CPLR 3212 summary judgment is granted to the extent of directing judgment in favor of the defendant declaring section 131-a of the Election Law of the State of New York constitutional.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to either party when there are no issues of fact.

Bevan v. New York State Teachers' Retirement System · filed 1973-07-02(b)

Since defendants have moved for summary judgment and since there are no issues of fact on plaintiff’s causes of action ánd since this court may grant summary judgment to either party (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]), the court hereby declares that portion of subdivision 1 of section 511 of the Education Law which authorizes the involuntary retirement of a tenured teacher • because of alleged physical or mental incapacity upon application of the employer, without a hearing, either before the employer Board of Education or the Retirement Board, to be unconstitutional.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the opposing party when the record warrants it.

In re the Estate of Crystal · filed 1973-10-19(b)

The court is of the opinion that the motion for summary judgment by respondent Helen Crystal is denied and that the executor is entitled to summary judgment dismissing these objections (CPLR 3212 subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party even without a cross motion.

Donato v. Cataffo · filed 1972-03-28(b)

... nevertheless, the court may grant summary judgment to a party even in the absence of a cross motion (22 West Main St. v. Boguszewski, 34 A D 2d 358, 360), citing CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to dismiss a counterclaim on a summary judgment motion even without a formal cross motion for that relief.

50 Realty Co. v. 135 East 50th Street Tenants Ass'n · filed 1972-11-09(b)

We conclude that, not only should summary judgment on the counterclaim have been denied, but it should have been dismissed without plaintiffs’ formal cross motion to that effect. (CPLR 3212, subd. [b].)

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to either party without a cross motion when the original motion seeks summary judgment.

Bates v. Inter-Island Mortgagee Corp. · filed 1973-06-28(b)

The contention that the practice was permissible under CPLR 3212 (subd. [b]) is untenable. This section allows the court to grant summary judgment to either party on a motion for summary judgment without the necessity for a cross motion. Here, the original motion was not for that relief.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to an opposing party that did not move for it when the motion searches the record.

Balducci v. Merchants National Bank & Trust Co. · filed 1972-08-15(b)

Although the defendant in opposing the motions did not move for summary judgment, such motions search the record and the court has power to grant judgment to the opposing side, and, therefore, summary judgment is also granted to the defendant dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to subdivision (b) of CPLR 3212, all without costs.

On summary judgment, a court may search the record to resolve a limitations defense once timeliness is raised.

Santaniello v. De Francisco · filed 1973-06-04(b)

Moreover, the court is impelled to resolve the timeliness defense completely, to “ search the record” once it is raised. (Cf. CPLR 3212, subd. [b]; 3211, subd. [c].) That the precise statutory citation was not pleaded ... is not determinative.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the opposing party when the record warrants it.

Advanced Refrigeration & Appliance Co. v. Insurance Co. of North America · filed 1973-11-15(b)

Thus, while Special Term properly refused to strike defendant’s answer, it should have gone further and granted summary judgment to the defendant (CPLR 3212, subd. [b']).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party when no material issue of fact exists.

C & B Wholesale Stationery v. S. De Bella Dresses, Inc. · filed 1973-11-19(b)

Since no material issues of fact exist, the granting of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff to the extent indicated herein is appropriate (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the opposing party when it denies the moving party’s motion.

Raia v. Cook · filed 1973-11-27(b)

Accordingly, the motion of the third-party defendant for summary judgment is denied and summary judgment granted to the third-party plaintiff (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) allows a court deciding a summary judgment motion to grant judgment to the opposing party even without a cross-motion.

Herbert Rosenthal Jewelry Corp. v. Honora Jewelry Co. · filed 1974-05-22(b)

We think adequate authority exists in this Circuit for us to follow the wholesome practice under New York CPLR § 3212(b), and in disposing of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, although not so requested, to grant summary judgment to defendants dismissing the complaint.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to search the record on a summary judgment motion and grant judgment to a party that did not cross-move.

Hodgkins v. Central School District No. 1 · filed 1974-04-29(b)

Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment permits this court to search the record, and if such demonstrates that any party is entitled, judgment will be granted without cross motion (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for an entitled party even without a cross motion.

City of White Plains v. Ferraioli · filed 1974-06-12(b)

Defendants did not cross-move for summary judgment; they simply opposed the city’s motion. CPLR, however, provides that any party, if entitled, may be granted summary ¡judgment without the necessity of a cross motion (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party when no substantial factual dispute remains and the record supports resolution as a matter of law.

Antinore v. State · filed 1974-06-12(b)

Satisfied that no substantial factual disputes have been presented and that there exists a sufficient factual basis from which it may resolve the issues here involved as a matter of law, the court concludes that summary judgment may properly be awarded, even to the extent that such judgment may be rendered ... in favor of the nonmovant plaintiff (CPLR 3212, subd. [b]).

A party opposing summary judgment must submit evidentiary facts or materials that rebut the movant’s prima facie showing and demonstrate a triable issue of ultimate fact.

Bachrach v. AG · filed 1975-02-19(b)

In order to defeat summary judgment, with this stated background, it was incumbent upon plaintiff “ to submit evidentiary facts or materials, by affidavit or otherwise, rebutting the prima facie showing * * * and demonstrating the existence of a triable issue of Ultimate fact ” (Indig v. Finkelstein, 23 N Y 2d 728; CPLR 3212, subd. [b]), all "of which hé has failed to establish.

Section 3212(b) requires the party opposing summary judgment to show material facts sufficient to create a triable issue.

Shaw v. Time-Life Records · filed 1975-12-04(b)

Rather, the plaintiff must establish the existence of material facts of sufficient import to create a triable issue.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to search the record on a summary judgment motion and grant judgment to an adequately informed party that did not move for it.

Goodnough v. Alexander's Inc. · filed 1975-06-19(b)

While technically Alexander’s has not moved for summary judgment here, this decision disposes of the case against it also. ... A motion for summary judgment in effect searches the record, and, once unleashed, finds judicial discretion in applying it to concerned and adequately informed parties.

Section 3212(b) allows a court to grant summary judgment to a party who did not move for it when that party is entitled to judgment.

Donnelly v. Mustang Pools, Inc. · filed 1975-10-23(b)

Although the plaintiffs did not cross-move for summary judgment, the court is empowered by CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) to grant summary judgment to any party, if it shall appear that any party other than the moving party is entitled to summary judgment, without the necessity of a cross motion.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to award summary judgment to the nonmoving party when the record establishes its entitlement to judgment.

Senia v. Government Employees Insurance · filed 1975-12-05(b)

As the record clearly demonstrates that plaintiff had not yet commenced loading the insured vehicle under this more narrow test, this court directs that summary judgment be entered in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; Davis v Shelton, 33 AD2d 707; Cutting Room Appliance Corp. v Finkelstein, 33 AD2d 674).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party without a cross motion.

State v. Rutkowski · filed 1975-12-31(b)

This court is empowered by CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) on a summary judgment motion by plaintiffs to grant summary judgment to defendants, notwithstanding that defendants did not request such relief by cross motion.

Section 3212(b) does not permit summary judgment in the main action based on a motion for summary judgment in a third-party action.

Sutton v. Cobb · filed 1975-12-18(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) which provides ... that if any party other than the moving party is not entitled to summary judgment the court may grant such judgment without the necessity of a cross motion, does not authorize appellant to obtain summary judgment in the original action of Suttons against appellant on a motion for summary judgment in the third-party action.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the party opposing the motion.

Board of Education v. Licata · filed 1976-07-12(b)

Special Term’s order should be reversed and summary judgment granted in favor of defendant (CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the plaintiff on its own motion when denying the defendant’s motion.

Rappa v. American Airlines, Inc. · filed 1976-08-02(b)

Accordingly, motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied, and, on its own motion pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) the court directs summary judgment in the sum of $1,449, plus interest from date of demand of refund, plus the costs of this motion, to be rendered in favor of plaintiff.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that did not cross-move for it.

Scavone v. Kings Craft Corp. · filed 1976-12-10(b)

While plaintiff did not cross-move for summary judgment dismissing defendant’s defense of release, such relief may be granted (CPLR 3212, subd [b]). It being established on the evidence submitted by plaintiff on the motion to renew and reargue that defendant had notice of the subrogated claim of Hartford Insurance Company, the defense based upon the releases signed by Hartford’s insured and asserted to preclude Hartford is dismissed and summary judgment granted plaintiff dismissing the defense of release.

Subdivision (b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party when the opposing party moves for summary judgment.

Rapp v. Carey · filed 1977-01-06(b)

They have moved for a preliminary injunction, and defendants have cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. ... Plaintiffs shall be granted judgment declaring Executive Order No. 10.Í to be unconstitutional and enjoining its enforcement (CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party when appropriate.

Levy v. Bahou · filed 1977-04-15(b)

Under CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), this court is empowered to grant summary judgment to any party other than the moving party if it appears that such action is appropriate.

An opponent of a properly supported summary judgment motion must offer factual allegations showing a material, triable issue of fact.

Harris v. City of Buffalo · filed 1977-05-09

Opposition to an appropriately supported motion for summary judgment must be similarly supported by factual allegations tending to show the existence of some material, triable issue of fact (4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 3212.05c). The defendants have offered no such proof herein and I find their remaining defenses to be without merit. The plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is therefore granted.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the movant’s adversary even if that party did not request it.

Howell v. Davis · filed 1977-07-11(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) permits the court, on a summary judgment motion, to grant it instead to the movant’s adversary, even though the latter did not request such relief.

A party opposing summary judgment must present facts in evidentiary form that raise a genuine issue requiring trial; conclusory fraud assertions are insufficient.

Ronson v. Ronson · filed 1977-07-12(b)

Defendant’s papers in response to the motion fail to raise a genuine issue of fact requiring a trial (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; O’Meara Co. v National Park Bank, 239 NY 386, 395).

Section 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present evidentiary facts that raise a triable issue; conclusory assertions do not suffice.

Freedman v. Chemical Construction Corp. · filed 1977-12-15

It is elementary that conclusory assertions will not defeat summary judgment.

On a summary judgment motion in a public official’s libel action, the plaintiff must allege evidentiary facts sufficient to permit an inference of actual malice.

Orr v. Lynch · filed 1978-01-26

Thus, on this motion the burden was on the plaintiff to allege evidentiary facts sufficient to permit the inference of malice in the news reports of Korth’s statements.

Section 3212(b) requires more than conclusory statements in counsel’s affidavit to oppose summary judgment.

Philipps v. Philipps · filed 1978-03-06(b)

In addition, the conclusory statements made by plaintiff’s counsel in his opposing affidavit is the only proof submitted by plaintiff. Such proof falls woefully short of the requirements of CPLR 3212 (subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) does not allow an attorney’s affirmation consisting almost entirely of hearsay to defeat a summary judgment motion.

Homart Development Co. v. Graybar Electric Co. · filed 1978-05-29(b)

The affirmation of plaintiff’s attorney in opposition to the motion was comprised almost exclusively of hearsay representations and, as such, was legally insufficient to defeat the motion (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to the nonmoving party when the record warrants it.

Fullilove v. Carey · filed 1977-08-26(b)

Accordingly, summary judgment is granted in favor of petitioners. (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 3211.42; 6 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac, § 38:39.)

Section 3212(b) permits a court to search the record on a summary judgment motion and grant judgment to a party that did not move for it.

McGraw-Edison Credit Corp. v. Allstate Insurance · filed 1978-06-26(b)

Accordingly, having searched the record in this motion for summary judgment, I conclude that not only should defendant Allstate prevail on the appeal, but also that summary judgment should be granted in its favor (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment in favor of a party that did not cross-move for it.

Stoddard v. Town of Marilla · filed 1977-12-16(b)

While defendants-appellants did not cross-move for summary judgment they are nonetheless entitled to it (CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

A court may treat a motion as seeking summary judgment alongside dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(7) when the motion papers and the opposing party’s response make both grounds clear.

Monteferrante v. New York City Fire Department · filed 1978-05-09

The motion was clearly and properly treated by Special Term in its hybrid aspect, that is, as one for summary judgment and for dismissal under CPLR 3211 (subd [a], par 7).

Section 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to offer affirmative evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact.

Iorio v. City of New York · filed 1978-09-18

In opposing defendants’ motions for summary judgment, plaintiff was required to lay bare his proof with affirmative evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact — which he did not.

Section 3212(b) requires a party opposing summary judgment to offer evidentiary facts sufficient to raise a genuine issue for trial after the moving party makes a prima facie showing.

Small v. Marchese · filed 1978-09-18(b)

Plaintiffs were required to rebut defendants’ prima facie showing that their salesperson was unlicensed with evidentiary facts sufficient to raise a genuine issue to be resolved at a trial.

Section 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to present proof of a triable factual issue rather than rely on the pleadings alone.

Guiltinan v. Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center · filed 1978-09-28

At this point, the present CPLR 3212 motion for summary judgment no longer merely tests the pleadings, but requires the plaintiff to come forward and lay bare his proof, demonstrating that a bona fide issue of fact exists on his causes of action, warranting the trial of all or part of this matter.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party who did not cross-move when another party moves for summary judgment.

Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance v. Christopher · filed 1979-01-25(b)

Further, although Christopher failed to make such a cross motion upon Michigan’s motion for summary judgment, Special Term was empowered to and should have granted him summary judgment (CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party without a cross motion when the record establishes its entitlement to judgment.

Flaks, Zaslow & Co. v. Bank Computer Network Corp. · filed 1979-02-01(b)

Since there is no evidentiary support for defendant’s second counterclaim, plaintiff was entitled, even in the absence of a cross motion for such relief (CPLR 3212, subd [b]), to summary judgment in its favor on that counterclaim.

CPLR 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a party that did not cross-move when that party is entitled to judgment.

Golden v. Koch · filed 1979-02-15(b)

The defendant has moved for summary judgment. If another party is entitled to such judgment it may be granted without the necessity of a cross motion (CPLR 3212, subd [b]). Here, there are no issues of fact; only issues of law. Summary judgment is appropriate and shall be entered in favor of the plaintiffs declaring that the Mayor of the City of New York may not, as a member of the Board of Estimate, cast any vote during consideration of budget modifications under the provisions of subdivision b of section 124 of the Charter of the City of New York.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment despite a missing cross notice of motion when the papers seek the same relief and the circumstances warrant it.

HNC Realty Co. v. Bay View Towers Apartments, Inc. · filed 1978-11-13(b)

Although those papers were irregular in that they failed to contain a cross notice of motion for summary judgment, all the circumstances of this case indicate that they, too, should be awarded summary judgment in the interest of judicial economy (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]; see, also, Peoples Sav. Bank of Yonkers, N. Y. v County Dollar Corp., 43 AD2d 327, 334, affd 35 NY2d 836).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to award partial summary judgment to the opposing party on claims addressed by the motion.

Animalfeeds International, Inc. v. Banco Espirito Santo e Comercial de Lisboa · filed 1979-03-13(b)

In view of the foregoing conclusions of the court that no basis exists for plaintiffs claims that Banco Espirito required a license to act as the escrow agent, that the agreement is not so vague and indefinite as to be unenforceable and that the transfer of funds to the Irving Trust branch in Grand Cayman Island did not constitute conversion, summary judgment for plaintiff is denied and, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), partial summary judgment is awarded in favor of defendant dismissing the five causes of action which are the subject of this motion.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party without a cross motion when that party is entitled to judgment.

59th & Park Associates v. Inselbuch · filed 1979-03-20(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) specifically provides that if it shall appear that any party other than the moving party is entitled to a summary judgment, the court may grant such judgment without the necessity of a cross motion.

CPLR 3212(b) requires a party opposing summary judgment to show facts sufficient to require a trial of a factual issue.

Friends of Animals, Inc. v. Associated Fur Manufacturers, Inc. · filed 1979-04-05(b)

On the other hand, to defeat a motion for summary judgment the opposing party must "show facts sufficient to require a trial of any issue of fact” (CPLR 3212, subd [b]). ... Notwithstanding that the burden on the opponent is not always so heavy as that on the movant, in this case the opposing plaintiff has tendered no evidentiary proof of actual malice in any form.

A party opposing summary judgment must present proof of a genuine issue requiring a trial.

Mid-Hudson Nuclear Opponents, Inc. v. Consolidated Edison Co. · filed 1979-07-02

Quite obviously, plaintiffs misconceive the office and function of a motion for summary judgment. The granting of such a motion is the procedural equivalent of a trial (Falk v Goodman, 7 NY2d 87, 91). And "[ijt is axiomatic that a party who opposes summary judgment must reveal his proofs in order to show that there is a bona fide issue requiring a trial (Di Sabato v Soffes, 9 AD2d 927)." (Freedman v Chemical Constr. Corp., 56 AD2d 514, 516.)

Under CPLR 3212(b), a court may search the record and grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party when the opposing party moves for summary judgment.

Zaldin v. Concord Hotel · filed 1979-10-23(b)

The hotel did not cross-move for summary judgment, but the other side’s motion for such relief allows the court to search the record and, if warranted, grant summary ... judgment in favor of the nonmovant (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; see, e.g., Wiseman v Knaus, 24 AD2d 869).

Section 3212 permits a court to grant summary judgment to either party when one party moves for it.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Companies v. Brooks · filed 1979-10-31

Upon motion for summary judgment by one party, the court may grant it to either party.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that did not cross-move when no factual issue remains.

Lily Dale Assembly, Inc. v. County of Chautauqua · filed 1979-11-16(b)

Defendant did not cross-move for summary judgment on its counterclaim but in the affidavits responding to plaintiff’s motion, it requested summary judgment relief, and since no question of fact has been raised and no other irregularity in the tax proceedings is claimed, we grant its application (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; see Wiseman v Knaus, 24 AD2d 869).

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that did not move for it.

State v. City of Binghamton · filed 1979-11-21(b)

Accordingly, even though the defendant has not so moved, we grant summary judgment in its favor, dismissing the complaint (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]; ...).

Section 3212 requires a party opposing summary judgment to show a triable issue of fact; bare allegations are insufficient.

Signor v. City of Rochester · filed 1979-12-21

Special Term erred in denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment because of plaintiff’s failure to demonstrate the existence of any triable issue of fact (CPLR 3212).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that did not move for it when that party is entitled to judgment.

Mendel-Mesick-Cohen-Architects v. Peerless Insurance · filed 1980-02-26(b)

Instead of merely denying MMC’s motion on this score, Special Term should have granted summary judgment to Peerless on this issue, even though Peerless did not so move.

Under subdivision (b), a party opposing summary judgment must present evidentiary facts showing a genuine issue requiring trial.

Cucalon v. State · filed 1980-03-28(b)

Nothing is alleged which would warrant a trial of any issue of fact as is required by CPLR 3212 (subd [b]). ... The defendant cannot stand silent in opposition. It is incumbent upon it to come forward and lay bare its proof of evidentiary facts showing that there is a bona fide issue requiring a trial.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that did not move for it.

Zeman v. Zack Agency, Inc. · filed 1980-06-23(b)

Furthermore, pursuant to the court’s authority under CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), we direct that summary judgment be entered in favor of the Zemans and against the insurance company.

A party opposing summary judgment under CPLR 3212 must present proof of a genuine issue of fact for trial.

Marine Midland Bank v. Labour · filed 1980-12-01

It is incumbent upon a party opposing a motion for summary judgment to assemble, lay bare and reveal its proofs to establish the existence of a genuine issue of fact for trial.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court deciding a summary judgment motion to award judgment to the nonmoving party when the record establishes its entitlement.

Hammelburger v. Foursome Inn Corp. · filed 1980-08-25(b)

For the reasons set forth below, and pursuant to our authority under CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), we vacate the judgment and declare the mortgage null and void.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court to search the record and grant summary judgment to a party that did not cross-move.

American Home Assurance Co. v. Diamond Tours & Travel, Inc. · filed 1980-11-13(b)

Finally, although plaintiff did not cross-move for summary judgment, we have determined to grant plaintiff summary judgment as above indicated pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) in that such motion “searches the record.”

Section 3212(b) permits a court to dismiss a complaint on the plaintiff’s summary judgment motion when the undisputed facts show the plaintiff cannot recover.

Ginsberg v. Purcell · filed 1980-11-18(b)

The facts are uncontroverted. As stated in the papers on plaintiff's motion for summary judgment they are as follows: ... The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the complaint should be dismissed (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; Siegel, New York Practice, § 282).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to search the record and grant summary judgment to the nonmoving party when no disputed issues of fact remain.

Izzo v. Brooks · filed 1980-12-19(b)

There are no disputed issues of fact raised, the court has thoroughly “searched the record” and the law and accordingly grants summary judgment to defendant. (CPLR 3212, subd [b].)

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a party who did not move for it when the other party has moved for summary judgment.

Gedraitis v. Gedraitis · filed 1981-02-06(b)

There remains no reason for this court not to grant to both parties, by way of summary judgment, a conversion divorce. (We note that CPLR 3212 [subd (b)] permits the granting of summary judgment to a party who did not originally move for summary judgment as long as the other party had made such a motion.) All that remains as a possible dispute between the parties are the issues of the merger of the agreement in the final decree, modification of support provisions, and the allegation of a minor arrearage in payments which might presently exist.

Section 3212(b) permits an appellate court to search the record and grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party.

Freidus v. Todem Homes, Inc. · filed 1981-02-09(b)

Pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), this court has the authority to search the record and grant summary judgment on appeal to the nonmovant (Wiseman v Knaus, 24 AD2d 869). Clearly, defendant Todem is entitled to summary judgment in its favor and we so direct.

Section 3212(b) requires fair notice and an opportunity to present defenses when a court grants summary judgment beyond the motion before it.

Jillsunan Corp. v. Wallfrin Industries, Inc. · filed 1981-01-22(b)

The power of the court to grant summary judgment to a party other than the moving party (CPLR 3212, subd [b]) does not dispense with the necessity for fair notice and opportunity to a party to present his defenses.

Section 3212(b) allows a court considering a summary judgment motion to search the record and grant judgment to a party that did not move.

Lewis v. Counts · filed 1981-05-11(b)

We note that such relief is not foreclosed by defendants’ failure to move for summary judgment. A motion for summary judgment searches the record (CPLR 3212, subd [b]; Peoples Sav. Bank of Yonkers v County Dollar Corp., 43 AD2d 327, 334, affd 35 NY2d 836).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a defendant on the plaintiff's motion.

Central National Bank v. Paton · filed 1981-06-01(b)

The motion for summary judgment is denied and summary judgment in favor of the defendants, Patón, is hereby granted pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]).

Under CPLR 3212(b), conclusory allegations of fraud without evidentiary support do not raise a triable issue of fact.

Mastan Company v. Weil · filed 1981-10-29(b)

Weil’s further contention of fraudulent inducement based on misrepresentations that plaintiff would finance another apartment project similarly fails to create a triable issue of fact. His affidavits and answer are conclusory in nature and are virtually devoid of evidentiary support.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a party who did not cross-move, including in a CPLR 3213 proceeding.

Reschke v. Eadi · filed 1981-11-13(b)

Defendant did not cross-move for summary judgment but the provisions of CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) apply alike to CPLR 3213 and summary judgment is warranted in this case.

Under CPLR 3212(b), a party opposing summary judgment must present evidentiary facts showing that a trial is required; conclusory allegations repeated from the pleadings do not suffice.

Fishman v. County of Nassau · filed 1981-11-23(b)

Consequently, plaintiff did not sustain her burden of demonstrating, by means of evidentiary facts, that a trial was required with respect to the allegations in the complaint. ... Accordingly, the complaint must be dismissed on the merits pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]).

Section 3212(b) requires an affidavit from a person with knowledge of the facts to support a summary judgment motion, but does not specify what documents are required to oppose one.

Peralte v. La Cerra · filed 1982-01-18(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) speaks only as to what is required to support a motion for summary judgment. The statute contains nothing which indicates what documents are required to oppose and defeat a summary judgment motion.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that did not cross-move.

City of Buffalo v. Wysocki · filed 1982-02-11(b)

Despite the failure of the City to cross-move for summary judgment this court, pursuant to CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), orders that summary judgment be granted in favor of the City and against the following defendants who did not make appropriate legal protest of their taxes: 1. Members of the “first subclass” denominated in the class certification order of this court on August 17,1981 as “all payers of real property taxes to the city of buffalo FOR ANY AND/OR ALL OF THE FISCAL YEARS 1974-1975 THROUGH 1977-1978, INCLUSIVE, NOT UNDER PROTEST.”

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a party that has not formally cross-moved for it.

Trans World Maintenance Service, Inc. v. Rodd · filed 1982-03-18(b)

Although defendants have not formally cross-moved for summary judgment, they have requested same in their answering papers. ... In light of the fact that this ejectment action is based on such notice, the court, pursuant to the last sentence of CPLR 3212 (subd [b]), grants summary judgment to defendants dismissing all causes of action of the complaint.

Section 3212(b) requires admissible evidence to oppose summary judgment; an attorney’s affirmation without personal knowledge does not suffice.

Saxon v. Ong · filed 1982-04-19(b)

In opposing the motion for summary judgment, the affirmation of plaintiff’s attorney, who was without personal knowledge of the facts, did not supply the necessary admissible evidentiary showing to resist successfully the motion (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]; Roche v Hearst Corp., 53 NY2d 767, 769; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; Rotuba Extruders v Ceppos, 46 NY2d 223, 229).

Section 3212 permits summary judgment for a party entitled to it without a cross motion.

Filippone v. Filippone · filed 1981-11-18

This court must further grant summary judgment to the plaintiff without the necessity of a cross motion pursuant to CPLR 3212, it appearing that plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment declaring that said consent is invalid, revoked and of no force or effect.

Section 3212(b) does not permit summary judgment where the state of the pleadings deprived the opposing party of an opportunity to submit proof on the issue.

Hammelburger v. Foursome Inn Corp. · filed 1981-12-23(b)

Fortuitously defendant’s papers on the motion to amend supplied the omission by annexing Schwartz’ deposition, but had that not been so it would, nevertheless, have been improper to grant summary judgment to defendant under CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) in view of the state of the pleadings as the matter reached the Appellate Division.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment relief affecting a party not named in the motion papers when that party actively opposed the motion.

Greenspan v. Doldorf · filed 1982-04-26(b)

MVAIC’s cross claim against Doldorf for indemnification is also dismissed. ... (See CPLR 3212, subd [b].) ... Further, the fact that MVAIC was not named in Doldorf’s motion papers does not bar relief in view of MV AIC’s active participation in opposing the motion before Special Term and in opposing the appeal.

Bare denials unsupported by evidentiary facts are insufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment.

Chemical Bank v. Weiss · filed 1982-05-06

The question of whether the conditional denials are still intact, however, is not the decisive issue here, since mere denials of the elements, without evidentiary facts in support thereof, are not sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment (see Bankers Trust of Rockland County v Keesler, 49 AD2d 918).

CPLR 3212 permits a party to seek summary judgment in favor of the nonmoving party when the facts warrant it.

Tucker v. Tucker · filed 1982-07-22

Here, the defendant moves for partial summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, the nonmoving party. This practice is permissible under CPLR 3212 where the facts of a particular case warrant it.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party without a cross motion but does not require the court to grant it.

Ullo v. Ullo · filed 1982-07-23(b)

The statute provides that the absence of a cross motion does not preclude entry of a judgment in favor of the nonmovant, but it does not mandate such a judgment.

Section 3212(b) permits a court to award summary judgment to the opposing party even when that party did not move for it.

George H. Nutman, Inc. v. Aetna Business Credit, Inc. · filed 1982-08-06(b)

Accordingly, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is denied and summary judgment is awarded to the plaintiff in the sum of $46,501.60 with interest.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party when the facts warrant it.

M.V.R. v. T.M.R. · filed 1982-09-10(b)

Summary judgment may be granted to a nonmoving party if the facts warrant it.

Under CPLR 3212, once the moving party makes a prima facie showing, the opposing party must present evidence of a triable issue.

Sony Corp. of America v. American Express Co. · filed 1982-10-18

In opposing a motion for summary judgment, once a prima facie showing has been made, it is incumbent upon the opposing party to come forward with matters of an evidentiary nature to demonstrate the presence of a triable issue.

Section 3212(b) requires a party opposing summary judgment to show facts sufficient to require a trial of a factual issue.

Power Equipment Co. v. Palmyra Electric Co. · filed 1982-11-09(b)

Moreover, the affidavit submitted by defendant in response to plaintiff’s cross motion fails to “show facts sufficient to require a trial of any issue of fact” (CPLR 3212, subd [b]), nor does it demonstrate “acceptable excuse” for the failure to have done so (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562).

A clinical psychologist’s diagnosis of serious emotional impairment can be sufficient to defeat summary judgment on a serious-injury claim.

Lacomb v. Poland Central School District · filed 1982-11-15

It is the opinion of this court that such a diagnosis by a clinical psychologist is sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment.

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court, including an appellate court, to grant summary judgment to a nonmoving party even when that party did not request it.

Taterka v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance · filed 1982-12-21(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd |b]) permits the court, on a summary judgment motion, to grant it to any party other than the movant even when such relief is not specifically requested. The exercise of this authority may occur on the appellate level as well.

Section 3212(b) permits summary judgment for a nonmoving party in appropriate cases, even without a cross-motion.

Forgione v. Town of Harrison · filed 1983-01-17(b)

Although defendants have not cross-moved for summary judgment, such relief may be granted, in appropriate cases, to the nonmoving party (see CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

CPLR 3212(b) permits a court, including an appellate court, to grant summary judgment to the moving party’s adversary even if that adversary did not request it.

Glass v. Wiener · filed 1983-02-22(b)

CPLR 3212 (subd [b]) permits a court, on a summary judgment motion, to grant it instead to the movant’s adversary, even though the latter did not request such relief (Zeman v.Zack Agency, 75 AD2d 261; Howell v Davis, 58 AD2d 852). This relief is available even at the appellate level (Howell v Davis, supra; Peoples Sav. Bank of Yonkers v County Dollar Corp., 43 AD2d 327, 334, affd 35 NY2d 836).

Section 3212(b) permits a court to grant summary judgment to a defendant when the plaintiffs moved for summary judgment.

Neuner v. Newburgh City School District · filed 1983-03-14(b)

Therefore, Special Term erred in granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment. Instead, summary judgment should be granted to defendant (CPLR 3212, subd [b]).

A party opposing summary judgment must submit admissible evidence supporting its defenses or show an acceptable excuse for failing to do so.

Melagrano v. Lieber · filed 1983-04-11

Inasmuch as respondent failed to oppose the motion by the tender of evidentiary proof in admissible form, such as an affidavit by herself based on personal knowledge of the facts constituting her defenses, or to demonstrate an acceptable excuse for her failure to do so, Special Term should have granted the motion (see Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065, 1067-1068; Behar v Ordover, 92 AD2d 557).