The Second Department, reversing Supreme Court, determined plaintiff’s failure to submit evidence of the exact amount of damages he suffered due to defendant’s breach of contract. Therefore plaintiff should not have been awarded summary judgment:
“A motion for summary judgment should not be granted where the facts are in dispute, where conflicting inferences may be drawn from the evidence, or where there are issues of credibility” … . “The function of the court on a motion for summary judgment is not to resolve issues of fact or determine matters of credibility, but merely to determine whether such issues exist” … .
Here, the plaintiff failed to submit competent evidence establishing the exact amount of damages that he sustained as a result of defendant’s breaches of the parties’ agreements, and “the record does not permit precise determination of the amount of the money judgment to which the plaintiff is entitled, including a calculation of prejudgment interest” … . Spilman v Matyas, 2023 NY Slip Op 00344, Second Dept 1-25-23
Practice Point: Here, on plaintiff’s summary judgment motion, plaintiff proved defendant’s breach of contract but did not present evidence of the exact amount of damages he suffered. Therefore the motion should not have been granted.