Caruso v. International House of Pancakes ( 1996 )

Since the plaintiff failed to address the merits of his case in opposition to the defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3012 (b), the court erred as a matter of law by granting the motion conditionally (see, Kel Mgt. v Rogers & Wells, 64 NY2d 904, 905; Stolowitz v Mount Sinai Hosp., 60 NY2d 685; Rosano v County of Nassau, 208 AD2d 704, 705; Sanders v Van Dome Mgt., 191 AD2d 630). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.