Jamie v. Jamie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jamie v. Jamie

8 A.D.3d 88, 777 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7961

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

DecidedJune 10, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.3d 88 (Jamie v. Jamie) 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

Jamie v. Jamie, 8 A.D.3d 88, 777 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7961 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered on or about September 24, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment dissolving the partnership, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs met none of the statutory prerequisites for judicial dissolution (Partnership Law § 63). A court may dissolve a partnership that is no longer viable, but other remedies may also exist short of liquidation where acts of wrongdoing have allegedly been perpetrated by the moving partner himself (see Drucker v Mige Assoc. II, 225 AD2d 427 [1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 807 [1996]). It is premature to conclude that the instant dispute has made continuation of the partnership impossible. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered on or about September 24, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment dissolving the partnership, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs met none of the statutory prerequisites for judicial dissolution (Partnership Law § 63). A court may dissolve a partnership that is no longer viable, but other remedies may also exist short of liquidation where acts of wrongdoing have allegedly been perpetrated by the moving partner himself (see Drucker v Mige Assoc. II, 225 AD2d 427 [1996], lv denied 88 NY2d 807 [1996]). It is premature to conclude that the instant dispute has made continuation of the partnership impossible. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Williams and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.3d 88, 777 N.Y.S.2d 908, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7961, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jamie-v-jamie-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack