Bates v. Printmaker International, Ltd.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bates v. Printmaker International, Ltd.

198 A.D.2d 29, 604 N.Y.S.2d 720

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 4, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 198 A.D.2d 29 (Bates v. Printmaker International, Ltd.) 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

Bates v. Printmaker International, Ltd., 198 A.D.2d 29, 604 N.Y.S.2d 720 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter M. Schackman, J.), entered October 28, 1992, which granted plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment against defendant-appellant in the amount of $163,046.84 plus interest from July 1, 1986, together with costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to defendant-appellant’s contention, there is nothing in the letter agreement between it and plaintiff to indicate that start-up costs of the venture were to be deducted from defendant-appellant’s net profits, upon which plaintiffs compensation was based.

Defendant-appellant’s attempt to vary or contradict the clear language of the agreement, therefore, was properly rejected (see, W.W.W. Assocs. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157, 162). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter M. Schackman, J.), entered October 28, 1992, which granted plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment against defendant-appellant in the amount of $163,046.84 plus interest from July 1, 1986, together with costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Contrary to defendant-appellant’s contention, there is nothing in the letter agreement between it and plaintiff to indicate that start-up costs of the venture were to be deducted from defendant-appellant’s net profits, upon which plaintiffs compensation was based.

Defendant-appellant’s attempt to vary or contradict the clear language of the agreement, therefore, was properly rejected (see, W.W.W. Assocs. v Giancontieri, 77 NY2d 157, 162). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 29, 604 N.Y.S.2d 720, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-printmaker-international-ltd-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack