Winthrop, Brown & Co. v. Williams, Brown & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Winthrop, Brown & Co. v. Williams, Brown & Co.

289 A.D.2d 67, 733 N.Y.S.2d 863, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12117

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

DecidedDecember 11, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 67 (Winthrop, Brown & Co. v. Williams, Brown & Co.) 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

Winthrop, Brown & Co. v. Williams, Brown & Co., 289 A.D.2d 67, 733 N.Y.S.2d 863, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12117 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about July 6, 2000, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for partial summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly pierced plaintiff’s corporate veil. While the claims made herein are not barred by the prior divorce action between plaintiff’s principal and the individual defendant, in which the court never reached matters of equitable distribution, neither are such claims amenable to resolution by way of corporate law given the transparency of the corporate entities. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Ellerin, Buckley and Marlow, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about July 6, 2000, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion for partial summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly pierced plaintiff’s corporate veil. While the claims made herein are not barred by the prior divorce action between plaintiff’s principal and the individual defendant, in which the court never reached matters of equitable distribution, neither are such claims amenable to resolution by way of corporate law given the transparency of the corporate entities. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Ellerin, Buckley and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 67, 733 N.Y.S.2d 863, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winthrop-brown-co-v-williams-brown-co-nyappdiv-2001.