From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Post v. Xerox Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 13, 1990
163 A.D.2d 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 13, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Wesley, J.

Present — Denman, J.P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lowery, JJ.


Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: From the evidence before it, Supreme Court was entitled to find that Xerox properly refused to pay plaintiff benefits under the voluntary reduction in force agreement. Plaintiff, as an employee of Xerox, was responsible for the maintenance of all of the Xerox facilities in Monroe County and the supervision of more than 600 employees. As such, he was bound at all times to exercise the utmost good faith in the performance of his duties for his employer. When he applied for the voluntary reduction in force (VRIF) benefits, plaintiff knew that Xerox would not approve the application if it had known the facts concerning his prior unethical conduct, yet he concealed those facts. Under the circumstances, he had a duty to speak and "the distinction between concealment and affirmative misrepresentation faded into legal insignificance" (Hadden v Consolidated Edison Co., 45 N.Y.2d 466, 470; see also, Donovan v Aeolian Co., 270 N.Y. 267, 271; Matter of First Citizens Bank Trust Co. v. Estate of Sherman, 250 App. Div. 339, 345; 60 N.Y. Jur 2d, Fraud and Deceit, §§ 94, 95).

Because plaintiff deliberately concealed material facts at the time the VRIF agreement was entered into, when he had a duty to speak, Xerox was entitled to rescission of the agreement.


Summaries of

Post v. Xerox Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 13, 1990
163 A.D.2d 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Post v. Xerox Corporation

Case Details

Full title:NICHOLAS B. POST, Appellant, v. XEROX CORPORATION, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 13, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 908 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
559 N.Y.S.2d 158

Citing Cases

Lopez v. Time, Inc.

The plaintiff purposefully exploited defendant's good will and sympathy through false representations that…

Hirschmann v. Hassapoyannes

Therefore, the board's reliance on cases imposing a duty to disclose in the context of fraud is misplaced.…