From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rose v. Associated Universities

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 28, 2003
309 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

1990, 1991

October 28, 2003.

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered June 25, 2002, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Frank Ruddy, for plaintiff-appellant.

Michael B. Hubbard, for defendants-respondents.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Gonzalez, JJ.


The complaint was properly dismissed since there is no triable issue as to whether the parties orally agreed to bind themselves to a contract giving plaintiff the exclusive rights to develop certain technology for which defendants held licensing rights from the United States Department of Energy. The record discloses that material terms, including pricing, the ramifications of the Department of Energy's potential exercise of "walk-in" rights, and insurance and indemnification provisions, were never agreed upon, and without definiteness as to such terms, there could have been no contract (see Cobble Hill Nursing Home, Inc. v. Henry Warren Corp., 74 N.Y.2d 475, 482, cert denied 498 U.S. 816).

We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Rose v. Associated Universities

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 28, 2003
309 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Rose v. Associated Universities

Case Details

Full title:SANFORD ROSE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ASSOCIATED UNIVERSITIES, INC., ET…

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

Date published: Oct 28, 2003

Citations

309 A.D.2d 666 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
765 N.Y.S.2d 860