Corneroli v. Borghi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Corneroli v. Borghi

11 A.D.3d 409, 783 N.Y.S.2d 572, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12682

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

DecidedOctober 28, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 A.D.3d 409 (Corneroli v. Borghi) 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

Corneroli v. Borghi, 11 A.D.3d 409, 783 N.Y.S.2d 572, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12682 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered September 4, 2003, which, after a framed issue hearing, granted the motion of defendants Warren J. Adelson, Adelson Galleries, Inc. and John Doe to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the contract by which plaintiff and defendant Borghi became partners in the sale of a valuable painting, plaintiff had no basis on which to assert any claims against the painting’s subsequent purchasers, defendants Warren J. Adelson, Adelson Galleries, Inc. and John Doe.

The court’s refusal to allow into evidence recordings of conversations between plaintiff and/or his counsel and Borghi, some of which were made, with that counsel’s assistance, after the litigation had commenced but before Borghi was represented, if erroneous (see McHugh v Fitzgerald, 280 AD2d 771 [2001]), was harmless (see O’Brien v Golan, 284 AD2d 256 [2001]), since the excluded evidence could not have been productive of a different outcome.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find [410]*410them unavailing. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered September 4, 2003, which, after a framed issue hearing, granted the motion of defendants Warren J. Adelson, Adelson Galleries, Inc. and John Doe to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the contract by which plaintiff and defendant Borghi became partners in the sale of a valuable painting, plaintiff had no basis on which to assert any claims against the painting’s subsequent purchasers, defendants Warren J. Adelson, Adelson Galleries, Inc. and John Doe.

The court’s refusal to allow into evidence recordings of conversations between plaintiff and/or his counsel and Borghi, some of which were made, with that counsel’s assistance, after the litigation had commenced but before Borghi was represented, if erroneous (see McHugh v Fitzgerald, 280 AD2d 771 [2001]), was harmless (see O’Brien v Golan, 284 AD2d 256 [2001]), since the excluded evidence could not have been productive of a different outcome.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find [410]*410them unavailing. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Gonzalez and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.3d 409, 783 N.Y.S.2d 572, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corneroli-v-borghi-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack