Baumberger Capital v. Canaan Partners

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baumberger Capital v. Canaan Partners

235 A.D.2d 216, 652 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 77

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 235 A.D.2d 216 (Baumberger Capital v. Canaan Partners) 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

Baumberger Capital v. Canaan Partners, 235 A.D.2d 216, 652 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 77 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered January 23, 1996, which dismissed all but the fourth and sixth causes of action in the complaint, unanimously mod[217]*217ified, on the law, to dismiss the fourth and sixth causes of action and, as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the complaint.

Given the existence of the finder’s agreement, dated October 14, 1994, which governs the relationship between the parties, plaintiff is precluded from seeking damages under the quasi-contractual theories of quantum meruit and unjust enrichment (Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R. R. Co., 70 NY2d 382, 388-389). We have considered plaintiff’s arguments on its appeal and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered January 23, 1996, which dismissed all but the fourth and sixth causes of action in the complaint, unanimously mod[217]*217ified, on the law, to dismiss the fourth and sixth causes of action and, as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants dismissing the complaint.

Given the existence of the finder’s agreement, dated October 14, 1994, which governs the relationship between the parties, plaintiff is precluded from seeking damages under the quasi-contractual theories of quantum meruit and unjust enrichment (Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R. R. Co., 70 NY2d 382, 388-389). We have considered plaintiff’s arguments on its appeal and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D.2d 216, 652 N.Y.S.2d 17, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 77, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baumberger-capital-v-canaan-partners-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack