From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kramer v. Danalis

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 14, 2012
92 A.D.3d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-02-14

Ari KRAMER, etc., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Ioannis DANALIS, Defendant–Respondent.

Haynes & Boone, LLP, New York (Kenneth J. Rubinstein of counsel), for appellant. Schillinger & Finsterwald, LLP, White Plains (Peter Schillinger of counsel), for respondent.


Haynes & Boone, LLP, New York (Kenneth J. Rubinstein of counsel), for appellant. Schillinger & Finsterwald, LLP, White Plains (Peter Schillinger of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Milton A. Tingling, J.), entered March 16, 2011, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action for breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, constructive trust, unjust enrichment and breach of contract, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion denied.

The general assertions by defendant's and Irving Bush's accountant that, in his review of the general ledgers and banking records, he observed no financial irregularities or unfair conduct by defendant, is insufficient to demonstrate defendant's entitlement to judgment dismissing the specific claims alleged. Thus, plaintiff's obligation to raise an issue of fact in opposition never arose.

We note that the law of the case doctrine has no bearing on the allegations of self-dealing, which are separate from the claim resolved on the prior appeal by our finding that there was no issue of fact as to the existence of a confidential or fiduciary relationship with regard to a 2002 agreement (66 A.D.3d 539, 887 N.Y.S.2d 563 [2009] ). We also note that discovery has not yet been completed.

MAZZARELLI, J.P., SAXE, MOSKOWITZ, FREEDMAN, MANZANET–DANIELS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Kramer v. Danalis

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Feb 14, 2012
92 A.D.3d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

Kramer v. Danalis

Case Details

Full title:Ari KRAMER, etc., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Ioannis DANALIS…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Feb 14, 2012

Citations

92 A.D.3d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1122
938 N.Y.S.2d 428

Citing Cases

Moyal v. Group IX, Inc.

In their moving papers, they merely established that Telecom Switching paid Group IX a certain amount; one…