Opinion
06-06-2017
NEW YORK STUDIOS, INC., et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. STEINER DIGITAL STUDIOS, et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Guazzo & Guazzo, New York (Delia M. Guazzo of counsel), for appellants. Crawford Bringslid Vander Neut, LLP, Staten Island (Allyn J. Crawford of counsel), for respondents.
Guazzo & Guazzo, New York (Delia M. Guazzo of counsel), for appellants. Crawford Bringslid Vander Neut, LLP, Staten Island (Allyn J. Crawford of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered on or about April 15, 2016, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants' motion to dismiss the causes of action for usurpation of corporate opportunities and an accounting, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint.
The parties' operating agreement, which allows defendants to compete with plaintiff Eponymous Associates, LLC, does not flatly contradict plaintiffs' claim that defendants usurped Eponymous's corporate opportunities and assets (see CPLR 3211[a][1] ; Biondi v. Beekman Hill House Apt. Corp., 257 A.D.2d 76, 81, 692 N.Y.S.2d 304 [1st Dept.1999], affd. 94 N.Y.2d 659, 709 N.Y.S.2d 861, 731 N.E.2d 577 [2000] ; see also Leon v. Martinez, 84 N.Y.2d 83, 88, 614 N.Y.S.2d 972, 638 N.E.2d 511 [1994] ). However, the claim is not pleaded with the requisite particularity (see CPLR 3016[b] ; Peacock v. Herald Sq. Loft Corp., 67 A.D.3d 442, 443, 889 N.Y.S.2d 22 [1st Dept.2009] ).
In the absence of an allegation that plaintiffs demanded an accounting, the claim for an accounting fails to state a cause of action (see Unitel Telecard Distrib. Corp. v. Nunez, 90 A.D.3d 568, 936 N.Y.S.2d 17 [1st Dept.2011] ; Adam v. Cutner & Rathkopf, 238 A.D.2d 234, 241, 656 N.Y.S.2d 753 [1st Dept.1997] ; compare Kaufman v. Cohen, 307 A.D.2d 113, 123–124, 760 N.Y.S.2d 157 [1st Dept.2003] ).
RENWICK, J.P., RICHTER, FEINMAN, GISCHE, KAHN, JJ., concur.