AMS Products, LLC v. Signorile

66 A.D.3d 929, 886 N.Y.S.2d 830
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 27, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 66 A.D.3d 929 (AMS Products, LLC v. Signorile) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
AMS Products, LLC v. Signorile, 66 A.D.3d 929, 886 N.Y.S.2d 830 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract and for a permanent injunction, inter alia, enjoining the defendant from soliciting directly or indirectly any of the customers of his former company, the assets of which he sold to the plaintiff, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered May 9, 2008, as granted its motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining the defendant from manufacturing or selling such goods in the New York City metropolitan area as were manufactured and sold by that company.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

Only an aggrieved party may appeal from an order or judgment pursuant to CPLR 5511 (see Unitrin Advantage Ins. Co. v Duclaire, 49 AD3d 863 [2008]). Where a party obtains the relief it seeks from the Supreme Court, is not aggrieved by that order (id.; see DiMare v O’Rourke, 35 AD3d 346 [2006]; Evans v Nab Constr. Corp., 80 AD2d 841 [1981]).

Here, the plaintiff, by its motion, sought a preliminary injunction enjoining the defendant from “engaging in any business, trade or occupation” within the New York City metropolitan area that was “similar to the one” he sold to the plaintiff. The Supreme Court granted all of the relief requested in the plaintiffs motion. Consequently, the plaintiff is not an aggrieved party.

To the extent that the plaintiff requests relief on this appeal which was not sought before the Supreme Court, that request is not properly before this Court. Mastro, J.P., Miller, Angiolillo and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pinilla v. New York City Transit Authority
122 A.D.3d 703 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
LaMarca v. Quirk
110 A.D.3d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Schwatka v. Super Millwork, Inc.
106 A.D.3d 897 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Lewis v. John
87 A.D.3d 564 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Brown v. Smith
76 A.D.2d 939 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 A.D.3d 929, 886 N.Y.S.2d 830, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ams-products-llc-v-signorile-nyappdiv-2009.