Reback v. Story Productions, Inc.

9 A.D.2d 880, 193 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5680
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 8, 1959
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 9 A.D.2d 880 (Reback v. Story Productions, 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
Reback v. Story Productions, Inc., 9 A.D.2d 880, 193 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5680 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to respondent. The allegations of [881]*881the counterclaim which was dismissed are similar to those contained in a counterclaim in Knapp Engraving v. Keystone Photo (1 A D 2d 170, 172-173). In that case we held that there should not be introduced into a trial “ a separate and distinct cause o£ action affirmatively seeking judgment and damages for the unjustifiable and malicious prosecution of the complaint itself”. Moreover, even assuming the truth of defendant’s allegations, and if it eventually is determined that plaintiffs’ suit was without basis, appellant could thereafter assert its claim by an independent suit. The dismissal of the counterclaim is without prejudice to the commencement of such a separate action. In disposing of the application, Special Term ruled that the 1945 agreement imposed an implied obligation on appellant “ either to exploit the rights transferred to it or else, at least, to use its best efforts to do so ”. Since Special Term found the agreement ambiguous, and that paroi evidence could be offered at the trial to resolve the ambiguity, it was premature to eliminate defendant’s claim that it was not obligated to do anything but pay plaintiffs the $100,000 for the rights conveyed. Whether there was any implied obligation, and its scope, are to be determined at the trial, and only after the defendant’s contention as to the essence of the agreement has been rejected. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, M. M. Frank and Valente, JJ. [15 Misc 2d 681.]

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 A.D.2d 880, 193 N.Y.S.2d 520, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reback-v-story-productions-inc-nyappdiv-1959.