From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Classic Office Supplies v. Classic Comm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 22, 1997
238 A.D.2d 221 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

April 22, 1997


Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Beverly Cohen, J.), entered October 20, 1995, after a non-jury trial, rescinding the subject contract and directing third-party defendant-appellant to return to third-party plaintiff-respondent the money paid on account of the contract, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The subject contract was properly rescinded due to a material misrepresentation of fact upon which respondent relied ( see, Bloomquist v. Farson, 222 N.Y. 375, 380). Further, as the misrepresentation was intentionally made by the corporate seller's sole officer, director and shareholder, the court properly pierced the corporate veil and imposed the corporate obligation upon appellant ( see, Matter of Morris v. New York State Dept. of Taxation Fin., 82 N.Y.2d 135, 140-142). Because the parties had agreed at trial to disregard corporate forms since all the involved corporations had been dissolved, the court properly awarded judgment to respondent.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

Classic Office Supplies v. Classic Comm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 22, 1997
238 A.D.2d 221 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Classic Office Supplies v. Classic Comm

Case Details

Full title:CLASSIC OFFICE SUPPLIES, INC., Plaintiff, v. CLASSIC COMMERCIAL OFFICE…

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

Date published: Apr 22, 1997

Citations

238 A.D.2d 221 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
657 N.Y.S.2d 7