Aigen v. Dimin

86 A.D.2d 896, 447 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15564
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 22, 1982·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for fraud, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated November 3, 1980, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Order modified, on the law, by adding thereto, after the provision denying the motion, the following: “as to the second cause of action but the motion is granted as to the first cause of action.” As so modified, order affirmed, without costs or disbursements. It is apparent from plaintiffs’ answers to defendant’s interrogatories that the claim of damages in the first cause of action is based solely upon unrealized profits. The law is well settled that one cannot obtain unrealized profits in an action for fraud (Reno v Bull, 226 NY 546; Oxenfeldt v Yonofsky, 276 App Div 374; Ungewitter v Toch, 31 AD2d 583). Titone, J. P., Mangano, Weinstein and O’Connor, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Aigen v. Dimin, 86 A.D.2d 896, 447 N.Y.S.2d 537, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15564 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

86 A.D.2d 896 (Aigen v. Dimin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zivian v. McNulty
136 A.D.2d 547 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Freschi v. Grand Coal Venture
588 F. Supp. 1257 (S.D. New York, 1984)
Castle & Cooke, Inc. v. Lincoln Merchandise Corp.
103 A.D.2d 763 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1984)