Prieto v. Votation.com, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Prieto v. Votation.com, Inc.

49 A.D.3d 623, 852 N.Y.2d 779

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

DecidedMarch 11, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.3d 623 (Prieto v. Votation.com, 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

Prieto v. Votation.com, Inc., 49 A.D.3d 623, 852 N.Y.2d 779 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

The Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 which were to dismiss the first and fourth causes of action to recover damages for breach of an employment contract and fraud, respectively, insofar as asserted against the defendant Votation.com. Inc. (see CPLR 3211; Tiffany at Westbury Condominium v Marelli Dev. Corp., 40 AD3d 1073, 1076-1077 [2007]; Schenkman v New York Coll. of Health Professionals, 29 AD3d 671, 672 [2006]). Furthermore, the complaint was properly dismissed insofar as asserted against the defendants Osan Limited and Charles Smith (see Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin., 82 NY2d 135, 140-141 [1993]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Ritter, Garni and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

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

The Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the defendants’ motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 which were to dismiss the first and fourth causes of action to recover damages for breach of an employment contract and fraud, respectively, insofar as asserted against the defendant Votation.com. Inc. (see CPLR 3211; Tiffany at Westbury Condominium v Marelli Dev. Corp., 40 AD3d 1073, 1076-1077 [2007]; Schenkman v New York Coll. of Health Professionals, 29 AD3d 671, 672 [2006]). Furthermore, the complaint was properly dismissed insofar as asserted against the defendants Osan Limited and Charles Smith (see Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin., 82 NY2d 135, 140-141 [1993]).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Ritter, Garni and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 623, 852 N.Y.2d 779, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prieto-v-votationcom-inc-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack