From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milistar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 31, 2005
18 A.D.3d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

6201.

May 31, 2005.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered April 26, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiff summary judgment and awarded the principal sum of $47,402.20, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Before: Andrias, J.P., Friedman, Marlow, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.


Defendant Hershko's affidavit, offering only bald allegations of oral protest to plaintiff's invoices, was insufficient to defeat plaintiff's entitlement to summary judgment on an account stated, and the documentary evidence failed to substantiate defendants' claim that the invoices did not accurately set forth credits to which defendants were entitled ( Manhattan Telecom. Corp. v. Best Payphones, 299 AD2d 178). As to Hershko's liability, the evidence in the record establishes that defendant Natasha was not a legal corporation, but rather a mere alter ego of Hershko, and the corporation's debt should thus be imputed to Hershko individually ( see Artech Info. Sys. v. Tee, 280 AD2d 117).


Summaries of

Milistar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 31, 2005
18 A.D.3d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Milistar

Case Details

Full title:MILISTAR (NY) INC., Respondent, v. NATASHA DIAMOND JEWELRY MANUFACTURERS…

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

Date published: May 31, 2005

Citations

18 A.D.3d 402 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
797 N.Y.S.2d 10

Citing Cases

Howard Borress Enterprises, Inc. v. CSJ, LLC

Moreover, taking plaintiff's pleading that CSJ was merely a shell corporation for its individual members as…