Gross v. McQuade

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gross v. McQuade

84 A.D.2d 828, 449 N.Y.S.2d 445, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16054

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

DecidedNovember 30, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 84 A.D.2d 828 (Gross v. McQuade) 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

Gross v. McQuade, 84 A.D.2d 828, 449 N.Y.S.2d 445, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16054 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for a declaratory judgment, plaintiffs appeal and defendant cross-appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sacks, J.), dated July 27, 1981, which, after' a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiffs first, second and third causes of action, and dismissed defendant’s third counterclaim. Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the provision dismissing plaintiffs’ second cause of action and substituting therefor a provision declaring that no partnership or joint venture existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and that defendant possessed the sole right, title, and/or interest in, and to, a certain liquid gas metering device which was the subject of this action. As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. After a nonjury trial, the court determined that a partnership or joint venture relationship did not exist between plaintiffs and defendant and that plaintiffs had no property rights in a certain liquid gas metering device. We agree and have modified the judgment to reflect this conclusion. (See Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334, app dsmd 371 US 74.) Mangano, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, for a declaratory judgment, plaintiffs appeal and defendant cross-appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sacks, J.), dated July 27, 1981, which, after' a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiffs first, second and third causes of action, and dismissed defendant’s third counterclaim. Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the provision dismissing plaintiffs’ second cause of action and substituting therefor a provision declaring that no partnership or joint venture existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and that defendant possessed the sole right, title, and/or interest in, and to, a certain liquid gas metering device which was the subject of this action. As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. After a nonjury trial, the court determined that a partnership or joint venture relationship did not exist between plaintiffs and defendant and that plaintiffs had no property rights in a certain liquid gas metering device. We agree and have modified the judgment to reflect this conclusion. (See Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334, app dsmd 371 US 74.) Mangano, J. P., Rabin, Gulotta and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 A.D.2d 828, 449 N.Y.S.2d 445, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16054, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gross-v-mcquade-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack