DeMeo v. Grimaldi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DeMeo v. Grimaldi

6 A.D.3d 385, 773 N.Y.S.2d 896

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

DecidedApril 5, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.3d 385 (DeMeo v. Grimaldi) 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

DeMeo v. Grimaldi, 6 A.D.3d 385, 773 N.Y.S.2d 896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, in effect, to dissolve the parties’ partnership, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), entered March 28, 2003, as, upon an order of the same court dated December 19, 2002, failed to award him damages in connection with the dissolution of the partnership as an offset against the amount owed to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the defendant failed to show that the plaintiff breached the parties’ partnership agreement (see generally Hotel Prince George Affiliates v Maroulis, 62 NY2d 1005 [1984]; Napoli v Domnitch, 18 AD2d 707 [1962], affd 14 NY2d 508 [1964]). Accordingly, the defendant was not entitled to an award of damages. In light of this determination, we need not.reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Altman, J.P., Florio, Luciano and Mastro, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, in effect, to dissolve the parties’ partnership, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), entered March 28, 2003, as, upon an order of the same court dated December 19, 2002, failed to award him damages in connection with the dissolution of the partnership as an offset against the amount owed to the plaintiff.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the defendant failed to show that the plaintiff breached the parties’ partnership agreement (see generally Hotel Prince George Affiliates v Maroulis, 62 NY2d 1005 [1984]; Napoli v Domnitch, 18 AD2d 707 [1962], affd 14 NY2d 508 [1964]). Accordingly, the defendant was not entitled to an award of damages. In light of this determination, we need not.reach the defendant’s remaining contention. Altman, J.P., Florio, Luciano and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.3d 385, 773 N.Y.S.2d 896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/demeo-v-grimaldi-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack