Trans-State Hay & Feed Corp. v. Faberge, Inc.

42 A.D.2d 535, 344 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4190
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 12, 1973
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 42 A.D.2d 535 (Trans-State Hay & Feed Corp. v. Faberge, 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
Trans-State Hay & Feed Corp. v. Faberge, Inc., 42 A.D.2d 535, 344 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4190 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered on October 6,1971, denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the second and third causes of action, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted, and the second and third causes of action dismissed and severed. Appellant shall recover of respondent $60 costs and disbursements of this appeal. The allegations contained in the second cause of action failed to establish a claim independent of the first cause of action sounding in breach of contract. Plaintiff was damaged, if at all, solely by defendants’ failure to deliver the subject merchandise. There ' is no allegation in the second cause of action indicating that plaintiff was injured as a result of the claimed actions constituting the fraud or interference with the third-party contract, and accordingly, the cause of action is insufficient as a matter of law (cf. Latzko v. Spector, 28 A D 2d 1111, affd. 22 N Y 2d 710). In effect, the allegations in the second cause of action merely establish the possible motivation for the breach of contract. Such, however, is irrelevant on the issue of damages; since recovery herein is limited to the actual damages suffered. (See 13 N. Y. Jur., Damages § 44.) plaintiff, of course, may possibly recover under the. first cause of action, if properly proven, and shown to be within the contemplation of the parties, the consequential damages incurred by the loss of any benefits in connection with the third-party contract. Since all that is validly pleaded is a claim for breach of contract, involving private rights, the third cause of action seeking punitive damages should also be dismissed. (Van Valkenburgh, Nooger <& Neville v. Hayden Pub. Go., 33 A. D 2d 766, affd. 30 N Y 2d 34.) Concur— Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Nunez, Lane and Tilzer, JJ.

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

Related

Berkowitz v. 29 Woodmere Blvd. Owners', Inc.
50 Misc. 3d 843 (New York Supreme Court, 2015)
Hamilton v. Hertz Corp.
130 Misc. 2d 1034 (New York Supreme Court, 1986)
Bradshaw v. Silversmith
122 Misc. 2d 544 (New York Supreme Court, 1983)
WEIR METRO AMBU-SERV., INC. v. Turner
442 N.E.2d 1268 (New York Court of Appeals, 1982)
Weir Metro Ambu-Service, Inc. v. Turner
442 N.E.2d 1268 (New York Court of Appeals, 1982)
Royal Globe Insurance v. Chock Full O'Nuts Corp.
86 A.D.2d 315 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Halpin v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America
401 N.E.2d 171 (New York Court of Appeals, 1979)
Charles v. Onondaga Community College
69 A.D.2d 144 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Shipsey v. Katz
58 A.D.2d 827 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
Davis v. Williams
92 Misc. 2d 1051 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1977)
Garrity v. Lyle Stuart, Inc.
353 N.E.2d 793 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Wegman v. Dairylea Cooperative, Inc.
50 A.D.2d 108 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
42 A.D.2d 535, 344 N.Y.S.2d 730, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trans-state-hay-feed-corp-v-faberge-inc-nyappdiv-1973.