Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
15 New York opinions name it 3 courts 2014–2026 13 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Basis Yield Alpha Fund v. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.green2 sentences2024No. 28 at 13—21. "[A] defendant can submit evidence in support of the motion attacking a well-[*7]pleaded cognizable claim [I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), dismissal would be appropriate. " Basis Yield Alpha Fund (Master) v. Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. , 980 N.Y.S.2d 21, 26 (1st Dept. 2014). 2024Basis Yield Alpha Fund (Master) v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., 115 A.D.3d 128, 134 [1st Dept. 2014] (emphasis added). “[T]he Court of Appeals has made clear that a defendant can submit evidence in support of the motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim.” Id. | 7 | 13 |
Biondi v. Beekman Hill House Apartment Corp.green2 sentences2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), 2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), | 2 | 2 |
Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milnegreen2 sentences2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), 2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), | 2 | 2 |
Matter of Haberman v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the City of Long Beachgreen2 sentences2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 | 2 | 2 |
Board of Managers v. Fairways at North Hillsgreen2 sentences2014As to the latter, the Court of Appeals has made clear that a defendant can submit evidence in support of the motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim (see Rovello, 40 NY2d 633 ; Guggenheimer, 43 NY2d 268 ; see also Board of Managers of Fairways at N. Hills Condominium v Fairways at N. Hills, 150 AD2d 32 [2d Dept 1989]). 4 When documentary evidence is submitted by a defendant “the standard morphs from whether the plaintiff stated a cause of action to whether it has one” (John R. 2014As to the latter, the Court of Appeals has made clear that a defendant can submit evidence in support of the motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim (see Rovello, 40 NY2d 633 ; Guggenheimer, 43 NY2d 268 ; see also Board of Managers of Fairways at N. Hills Condominium v Fairways at N. Hills, 150 AD2d 32 [2d Dept 1989]). 4 When documentary evidence is submitted by a defendant “the standard morphs from whether the plaintiff stated a cause of action to whether it has one” (John R. | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg
green
2 sentences2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), 2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), | 10 | 2014–2025 |
Rovello v. Orofino Realty Co.
green
2 sentences2014As to the latter, the Court of Appeals has made clear that a defendant can submit evidence in support of the motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim (see Rovello, 40 NY2d 633 ; Guggenheimer, 43 NY2d 268 ; see also Board of Managers of Fairways at N. Hills Condominium v Fairways at N. Hills, 150 AD2d 32 [2d Dept 1989]). 4 When documentary evidence is submitted by a defendant “the standard morphs from whether the plaintiff stated a cause of action to whether it has one” (John R. 2014As to the latter, the Court of Appeals has made clear that a defendant can submit evidence in support of the motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim (see Rovello, 40 NY2d 633 ; Guggenheimer, 43 NY2d 268 ; see also Board of Managers of Fairways at N. Hills Condominium v Fairways at N. Hills, 150 AD2d 32 [2d Dept 1989]). 4 When documentary evidence is submitted by a defendant “the standard morphs from whether the plaintiff stated a cause of action to whether it has one” (John R. | 8 | 2014–2025 |
Biondi v. Beekman Hill House Apartment Corp.
green
2 sentences2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), 2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), | 2 | 2025–2025 |
Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne
green
2 sentences2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), 2025Corp. , 257 AD2d 76, 81 (1st Dep't 1999) (quoting Guggenheimer , 43 NY2d at 275 ), aff'd , 94 NY2d 659 (2000). "'[T]he allegations are not deemed true[, and] [t]he motion should be granted where the essential facts have been negated beyond substantial question by the affidavits and evidentiary matter submitted.'" Id. (quoting Blackgold Realty Corp. v. Milne , 119 AD2d 512, 513 (1st Dep't 1986), aff'd , 69 NY2d 719 ). "[I]f the defendant's evidence establishes that the plaintiff has no cause of action ( i.e. , that a well-pleaded cognizable claim is flatly rejected by the documentary evidence), | 2 | 2025–2025 |
IIG Capital LLC v. Archipelago, L.L.C.
green
2 sentences2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Diaz v. Wyckoff Heights Med. Ctr.
neutral
2 sentences2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Weinstock v. Sanders
green
2 sentences2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 2024In reaching our conclusion, we adhere to well-established principles governing motion practice when seeking a CPLR 3211 dismissal: that "a defendant can submit evidence[, such as affidavits or testimony,] in support of [a CPLR 3211(a)(7)] motion attacking a well-pleaded cognizable claim" ( Basis Yield Alpha Fund [Master] v Goldman Sachs Group, Inc ., 115 AD3d 128, 134 [1st Dept 2014]); that doing so changes the CPLR 3211 inquiry from whether the pleader has stated a cause of action to whether the pleader has a cause of action amenable to relief ( see IIG Capital LLC v Archipelago, L.L.C. , 36 | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.