Coleman v. CMI Transportation, Inc.

222 A.D.2d 285, 635 N.Y.S.2d 212, 30 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1188, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12856
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 14, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 285 (Coleman v. CMI Transportation, Inc.) 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
Coleman v. CMI Transportation, Inc., 222 A.D.2d 285, 635 N.Y.S.2d 212, 30 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1188, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered on or about August 16, 1994, which granted defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaint as barred by the Statute of Frauds, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The cause of action alleging an oral stock purchase agreement was properly dismissed as barred by the Statute of Frauds (UCC 8-319; see, Dillon v Peretti, 176 AD2d 497), there being no issues of fact warranting possible application of the doctrines of promissory estoppel and partial performance. Assuming that plaintiff was promised an equity interest in defendant corporation in exchange for his services on its behalf, he suffered no unconscionable injury as evidenced by the substantial weekly compensation he received (see, Ginsberg v Fairfield-Noble Corp., 81 AD2d 318). Nor were his services " 'unequivocally referable’ ” to the promise (Anostario v Vicinanzo, 59 NY2d 662, 664), as evidenced by his admission that no money had ever been applied toward the purchase of the equity interest. Plaintiff’s remaining causes of action were properly [286]*286dismissed since proof of the oral contract, barred by the Statute of Frauds, would be necessary to recover under each of them (see, Bernbach v Camp Wah-nee, 176 AD2d 304; Rogoff v San Juan Racing Assn., 77 AD2d 831, affd 54 NY2d 883). Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Ross, Nardelli, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Related

In re the Estate of Hennel
133 A.D.3d 1120 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
222 A.D.2d 285, 635 N.Y.S.2d 212, 30 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 1188, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coleman-v-cmi-transportation-inc-nyappdiv-1995.