From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pizzo v. Goor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 29, 2008
50 A.D.3d 586 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Summary

holding that contract that facilitated adultery was void on public policy grounds and thus could not support IIED claim

Summary of this case from Truman v. Brown

Opinion

No. 3498.

April 29, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Patricia Anne Williams, J.), entered on or about March 22, 2007, which, insofar as appealed from, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Tacopina Arnold, LLC, New York (Joseph Tacopina of counsel), for appellant.

Barry N. Berger, New York, for respondent.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Nardelli, Buckley and Catterson, JJ.


Defendant's promise to pay plaintiff money at the end of their cohabitation relationship is unenforceable because the main consideration therefor, under the parties' cohabitation agreement, was plaintiffs provision of "companionship (both platonic and sexual)" ( see Morone v Morone, 50 NY2d 481, 486; McRay v Citrin, 270 AD2d 191). Furthermore, the agreement, which was executed prior to plaintiffs divorce, facilitated adultery ( see Dulko v Reich, 276 AD2d 521). Plaintiffs causes of action for fraud, unjust enrichment, imposition of a constructive trust and intentional infliction of emotional distress are based on the promises contained in the agreement and therefore cannot be maintained ( see Jennings v Hurt, 160 AD2d 576, lv denied 77 NY2d 804; cf. Artache v Goldin, 133 AD2d 596, 600). We have considered plaintiffs other arguments and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Pizzo v. Goor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 29, 2008
50 A.D.3d 586 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

holding that contract that facilitated adultery was void on public policy grounds and thus could not support IIED claim

Summary of this case from Truman v. Brown
Case details for

Pizzo v. Goor

Case Details

Full title:JANET PIZZO, Appellant, v. JOEL GOOR, Respondent, et al., Defendant

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

Date published: Apr 29, 2008

Citations

50 A.D.3d 586 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 3960
857 N.Y.S.2d 526

Citing Cases

Farre v. Lours

Here, as discussed above, plaintiff made minimal contributions to the homes in general and none to their…

Truman v. Brown

As noted above, the agreement may be illegal and invalid, if the product of an implied or express threat of…