Sussman Sales Co. v. Kaufman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sussman Sales Co. v. Kaufman

269 A.D.2d 440, 702 N.Y.S.2d 918, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1360

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

DecidedFebruary 14, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 269 A.D.2d 440 (Sussman Sales Co. v. Kaufman) 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

Sussman Sales Co. v. Kaufman, 269 A.D.2d 440, 702 N.Y.S.2d 918, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1360 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), entered August 14, 1998, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $36,019.03.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and the complaint is dismissed, with costs.

The trial court properly determined that the plaintiff, a publishing sales representative, was “egregiously deceitful” in its representation of the defendants, publishers with whom it had contracted, and thereby disregarded its obligation to act in good faith (see, UCC 1-203; Aventine Inv. Mgt. v Canadian Imperial Bank, 265 AD2d 513). This finding warrants dismissal of the complaint since a breach of the obligation to act in good faith is a “ ‘disqualifying factor’ ” (Super Glue Corp. v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 132 AD2d 604, 605, after remand 159 AD2d 68) which precludes the plaintiff from recovering any unpaid commissions. Sullivan, J. P., Luciano, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), entered August 14, 1998, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $36,019.03.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and the complaint is dismissed, with costs.

The trial court properly determined that the plaintiff, a publishing sales representative, was “egregiously deceitful” in its representation of the defendants, publishers with whom it had contracted, and thereby disregarded its obligation to act in good faith (see, UCC 1-203; Aventine Inv. Mgt. v Canadian Imperial Bank, 265 AD2d 513). This finding warrants dismissal of the complaint since a breach of the obligation to act in good faith is a “ ‘disqualifying factor’ ” (Super Glue Corp. v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 132 AD2d 604, 605, after remand 159 AD2d 68) which precludes the plaintiff from recovering any unpaid commissions. Sullivan, J. P., Luciano, H. Miller and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 440, 702 N.Y.S.2d 918, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sussman-sales-co-v-kaufman-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack