Hand v. Kenyon & Kenyon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hand v. Kenyon & Kenyon

227 A.D.2d 137, 641 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4744

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

DecidedMay 2, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 227 A.D.2d 137 (Hand v. Kenyon & Kenyon) 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

Hand v. Kenyon & Kenyon, 227 A.D.2d 137, 641 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4744 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered March 29, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motion for an order directing defendant Kenyon & Kenyon to prepare and submit to plaintiff an accounting so as to permit the determination of the value of plaintiffs interest in the partnership as of November 8, 1991, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Since the partnership agreement that plaintiff signed expressly sets forth the exclusive method for calculating and distributing the partnership’s assets upon dissolution, plaintiff waived any right to a "judicial” accounting (Raymond v Brim-berg, 99 AD2d 988, 989). The IAS Court properly considered plaintiff s motion as a motion for discovery and properly denied it since plaintiff failed to establish that the written account previously provided by defendant pursuant to a preliminary conference order was prepared contrary to the methodology set forth in the partnership agreement or contrary to the practices followed by the firm for over twenty years, in which plaintiff had acquiesced while a member of the firm. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Davis, J.), entered March 29, 1995, which denied plaintiffs motion for an order directing defendant Kenyon & Kenyon to prepare and submit to plaintiff an accounting so as to permit the determination of the value of plaintiffs interest in the partnership as of November 8, 1991, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Since the partnership agreement that plaintiff signed expressly sets forth the exclusive method for calculating and distributing the partnership’s assets upon dissolution, plaintiff waived any right to a "judicial” accounting (Raymond v Brim-berg, 99 AD2d 988, 989). The IAS Court properly considered plaintiff s motion as a motion for discovery and properly denied it since plaintiff failed to establish that the written account previously provided by defendant pursuant to a preliminary conference order was prepared contrary to the methodology set forth in the partnership agreement or contrary to the practices followed by the firm for over twenty years, in which plaintiff had acquiesced while a member of the firm. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 A.D.2d 137, 641 N.Y.S.2d 307, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4744, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hand-v-kenyon-kenyon-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack