From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pintex Corp. v. Poughkeepsie Finishing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 21, 1996
233 A.D.2d 232 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

November 21, 1996.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered May 9, 1996, which, inter alia, denied defendant Pinetex, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Before: Wallach, J.P., Ross, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Plaintiff sufficiently alleged its ownership of "specific identifiable personal property" and defendant-appellant's "unauthorized dominion over the property to the exclusion of plaintiffs rights" to support its claim that defendant converted fabric that plaintiff sent to defendants Poughkeepsie Finishing Corp. and Priority Finishing Corp. for processing ( Aetna Cas. Sur. Co. v Glass, 75 AD2d 786). The complaint is not subject to dismissal at this juncture for lack of a demand, since defendant-appellant's unlawful acquisition of the fabric may be fairly inferred from the facts pleaded and plaintiffs supporting affidavit ( compare, Agawam Trading Corp. v Malbin Co., 37 AD2d 946; see, Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88).


Summaries of

Pintex Corp. v. Poughkeepsie Finishing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 21, 1996
233 A.D.2d 232 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Pintex Corp. v. Poughkeepsie Finishing Corp.

Case Details

Full title:PINTEX CORP., Respondent, v. POUGHKEEPSIE FINISHING CORP. et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 21, 1996

Citations

233 A.D.2d 232 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
650 N.Y.S.2d 537

Citing Cases

Tufo v. Pellegrino

In order to establish a cause of action for conversion it must, be proven by a fair preponderance of the…