TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Platzman v. American Totalisator Co.

Michael M. Platzman v. American Totalisator Company, Inc., , Defendants Michael M. Platzman v. Computer Sciences Corporation

Platzman v. Am. Totalisator Co., 383 N.E.2d 876 (N.Y. 1978)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 24, 1978
Citations
383 N.E.2d 87645 N.Y.2d 910411 N.Y.S.2d 2301978 N.Y. LEXIS 2350

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

On plaintiffs appeal the order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, on the memorandum at the Appellate Division.

On the appeal of American Totalisator Company, Inc., the order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and summary judgment granted dismissing the complaint as to American Totalisator. In his motion papers plaintiff tendered no evidentiary proof in support of his conclusory assertions that American Totalisator dealt with him individually rather than only as an officer-employee representative of Taller & Cooper, that he individually otherwise had a legally cognizable interest in the alleged system as against American Totalisator, or indeed that his system was different from that disclosed in the 1964 patent which thereby became public knowledge. For plaintiff to succeed in opposing the motion for summary judgment he must come forward with a tender of admissible proof sufficient to require a trial of the material questions of fact on which he rests his claims. We agree with the dissenters at the Appellate Division that plaintiff failed to do this here.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

*913 On plaintiff’s appeal: Order affirmed, with costs.

On defendant American Totalisator Company, Inc.’s, appeal: Order reversed, with costs, and summary judgment granted dismissing the complaint as to American Totalisator Company, Inc. Question certified answered in the negative.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 19 cases

View all citing references →
1979: 21980: 21981: 11982: 11984: 11985: 21986: 21987: 11989: 21998: 12010: 12018: 12024: 219792026peak 1979 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Zuckerman v. City of New York404 N.E.2d 718 (N.Y. 1980)
  2. Ferber v. Sterndent Corp.412 N.E.2d 1311 (N.Y. 1980)
  3. Herman v. Malamed110 A.D.2d 575 (1985)
  4. Centrone v. C. Schmidt & Sons, Inc.114 Misc. 2d 840 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1982)
  5. Rennie v. Barbarosa Transport, Ltd.151 A.D.2d 379 (1989)
  6. Marchi Jaffe Cohen Crystal Rosner & Katz v. All-Star Video Corp.107 A.D.2d 597 (1985)

Most recent

  1. Queens Neurology, P.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co.2024 NY Slip Op 50848(U) (N.Y. Sup. Kings 2024)
  2. Pastor v. August Aichhorn Ctr. for Adolescent Residential Care, Inc.2024 NY Slip Op 32243(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty. 2024)
  3. Vongphakdy v. State of New York2018 NY Slip Op 34615(U) (2018)
  4. Anderson-Haider v. State29 Misc. 3d 816 (2010)
  5. Drooker v. South Nassau Communities Hospital175 Misc. 2d 181 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1998)
  6. Rennie v. Barbarosa Transport, Ltd.151 A.D.2d 379 (1989)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list