From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Garcia v. Tamir

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 17, 2000
269 A.D.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Argued December 17, 1999

February 17, 2000

In an action to recover damages for unpaid wages, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), dated November 10, 1998, which granted the motion of the defendants Elliot Tamir and Hazim Abrahim pursuant to CPLR 3211 N.Y.CPLR(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them for failure to state a cause of action.

Leon Greenberg, New York, N.Y., for appellants.

Franklin, Gringer Lipp, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Robert G. Lipp of counsel), for respondents.

CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, J.P., GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, LEO F. McGINITY, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the complaint was properly dismissed insofar as asserted against the respondents. It is clear that this action was brought against the respondents in their alleged capacity as two of the 10 largest shareholders of the corporate defendants, pursuant to Business Corporation Law § 630 Bus. Corp.. The plaintiffs failed to comply with a condition precedent to such an action, in that they did not allege that judgment had been entered against any of the defendant corporations and returned unsatisfied. Therefore the complaint must be dismissed insofar as asserted against the respondents (see, Powers v. Adcraft Typographers, 86 A.D.2d 566; Grossman v. Sendor, 64 A.D.2d 561). In any event, the action must be dismissed insofar as asserted against the defendant Hazim Abrahim, since the complaint fails to allege that he is one of the 10 largest shareholders of any of the defendant corporations (see, Business Corporation Law § 630 Bus. Corp.[a]).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Garcia v. Tamir

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 17, 2000
269 A.D.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Garcia v. Tamir

Case Details

Full title:JOSE GARCIA, etc., et al., appellants, v. ELLIOT TAMIR, et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 17, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 423 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
702 N.Y.S.2d 904

Citing Cases

Malancea v. MZL Home Care Agency LLC

, regardless of theory or pleadings, then the actions are duplicative, Telesco v. Telesco Fuel & Masons…

Harris v. Intimo, Inc.

However, the claim as pled under BCL § 630 is dismissed at this time as "plaintiff[] failed to comply with a…