LaSalle Hotel Lessee, Inc. v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

LaSalle Hotel Lessee, Inc. v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.

29 A.D.3d 464, 816 N.Y.S.2d 347

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

DecidedMay 25, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 A.D.3d 464 (LaSalle Hotel Lessee, Inc. v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.) 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

LaSalle Hotel Lessee, Inc. v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc., 29 A.D.3d 464, 816 N.Y.S.2d 347 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammer[465]*465man, J.H.O.), entered July 7, 2005, which dismissed the complaint upon the prior grant of defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff failed to plead sufficiently (see Guggenheimer v Ginzburg, 43 NY2d 268, 275 [1977]) factual allegations of breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The plain, unambiguous language of the management agreement, when read as a whole (see Brooke Group v JCH Syndicate 488, 87 NY2d 530 [1996]), delegates to defendant the sole right to manage the hotel, including the right to establish employee wages and benefits, with no reservation for plaintiff to approve or disapprove that decision. The cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty, based on the same allegations as for breach of contract, was also properly dismissed (see Layden v Boccio, 253 AD2d 540 [1998]). And since no breach occurred, there can be no claim for declaratory judgment.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Marlow, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammer[465]*465man, J.H.O.), entered July 7, 2005, which dismissed the complaint upon the prior grant of defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff failed to plead sufficiently (see Guggenheimer v Ginzburg, 43 NY2d 268, 275 [1977]) factual allegations of breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty. The plain, unambiguous language of the management agreement, when read as a whole (see Brooke Group v JCH Syndicate 488, 87 NY2d 530 [1996]), delegates to defendant the sole right to manage the hotel, including the right to establish employee wages and benefits, with no reservation for plaintiff to approve or disapprove that decision. The cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty, based on the same allegations as for breach of contract, was also properly dismissed (see Layden v Boccio, 253 AD2d 540 [1998]). And since no breach occurred, there can be no claim for declaratory judgment.

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Marlow, Williams and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.3d 464, 816 N.Y.S.2d 347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lasalle-hotel-lessee-inc-v-marriott-hotel-services-inc-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack