Gover v. Escudo Construction Corp.

288 A.D.2d 435, 733 N.Y.S.2d 894, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11403
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 26, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 288 A.D.2d 435 (Gover v. Escudo Construction Corp.) 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
Gover v. Escudo Construction Corp., 288 A.D.2d 435, 733 N.Y.S.2d 894, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11403 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

—In an action to recover money owed pursuant to the terms of a joint venture agreement, the defendants Escudo Construction Corp. and Maria Fernandes appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), entered September 28, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $25,000.

Ordered that the judgment is modified by deleting the provision thereof awarding the principal sum of $25,000 and substituting therefor a provision awarding the principal sum of $23,290; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme [436]*436Court, Suffolk County, to recompute the amount of interest due on the award.

There were sufficient facts on the record to support a finding that the appellants breached the fiduciary duty owed the plaintiff as their partner in an ongoing joint venture, even though the plaintiff’s complaint asserted a cause of action sounding in fraud and not breach of fiduciary duty (see, Diemer v Diemer, 8 NY2d 206, 212).

Nevertheless, the court erred in awarding the plaintiff the sum of $25,000, based upon a determination that the appellants’ expenses were $7,500. Instead, the evidence shows that these expenses totalled $9,210, $1,710 more than the amount calculated by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the award to the plaintiff must be reduced by $1,710.

The appellants’ remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Santucci, J. P., McGinity, Luciano and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Solutia Inc. v. FMC Corp.
385 F. Supp. 2d 324 (S.D. New York, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
288 A.D.2d 435, 733 N.Y.S.2d 894, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gover-v-escudo-construction-corp-nyappdiv-2001.