HOME Popular Books Popular Audioooks Popular Textbooks Popular Freebooks More Genres

Book

Audiobook

Genres

Herbert Plaut v. Hgh Partnership

By Supreme Court of New York

Release : 1977-10-25

Genre : Law, Books, Professional & Technical

Kind : ebook

(0 ratings)
Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered April 19, 1977, granting defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, in this action to recover $35,000 for services rendered, on grounds of non-joinder of a necessary party without prejudice to service of an amended complaint upon all necessary parties, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $60 costs and disbursements payable to appellant and defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint denied. Plaintiff seeks compensation for acting as one of two escrowees, each selected by one of the parties, under an escrow agreement between defendant and the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). Special Term dismissed the complaint for the plaintiff's failure to seek recovery against both parties to the agreement. The defendant does not become solely liable to the plaintiff because it chose him. An escrowee acts for all parties having an interest in the fund in escrow (Farago v Burke, 262 NY 229, 233). We find Special Term in error, though, because the non-joinder of a necessary party should be excused when the plaintiff has no other effective remedy and no prejudice is demonstrated (CPLR 1001, subd [b]). HEW is not subject to this State's jurisdiction without a waiver of immunity (Larson v Domestic & Foreign Corp., 337 U.S. 682) and, contrary to defendant's assertion, jurisdiction would not lie in Federal court over it under title 28 (§ 1331, subd [a]) of the United States Code because the cause of action arises from the escrow agreement and not directly under the Federal laws governing HEW (Robinson v Wichita Falls & North Texas Community Action Corp., 507 F2d 245). Defendant also sought dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, an issue Special Term did not reach. Granting the complaint and plaintiff's affidavits the most favorable inferences, we conclude that a cause of action is stated, and since Special Term did not treat the motion as one for summary judgment, dismissal at this time would be premature (Rovello v Orofino Realty Co., 40 N.Y.2d 633).

Herbert Plaut v. Hgh Partnership

By Supreme Court of New York

Release : 1977-10-25

Genre : Law, Books, Professional & Technical

Kind : ebook

(0 ratings)
Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered April 19, 1977, granting defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint, in this action to recover $35,000 for services rendered, on grounds of non-joinder of a necessary party without prejudice to service of an amended complaint upon all necessary parties, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $60 costs and disbursements payable to appellant and defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint denied. Plaintiff seeks compensation for acting as one of two escrowees, each selected by one of the parties, under an escrow agreement between defendant and the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW). Special Term dismissed the complaint for the plaintiff's failure to seek recovery against both parties to the agreement. The defendant does not become solely liable to the plaintiff because it chose him. An escrowee acts for all parties having an interest in the fund in escrow (Farago v Burke, 262 NY 229, 233). We find Special Term in error, though, because the non-joinder of a necessary party should be excused when the plaintiff has no other effective remedy and no prejudice is demonstrated (CPLR 1001, subd [b]). HEW is not subject to this State's jurisdiction without a waiver of immunity (Larson v Domestic & Foreign Corp., 337 U.S. 682) and, contrary to defendant's assertion, jurisdiction would not lie in Federal court over it under title 28 (§ 1331, subd [a]) of the United States Code because the cause of action arises from the escrow agreement and not directly under the Federal laws governing HEW (Robinson v Wichita Falls & North Texas Community Action Corp., 507 F2d 245). Defendant also sought dismissal of the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, an issue Special Term did not reach. Granting the complaint and plaintiff's affidavits the most favorable inferences, we conclude that a cause of action is stated, and since Special Term did not treat the motion as one for summary judgment, dismissal at this time would be premature (Rovello v Orofino Realty Co., 40 N.Y.2d 633).

advertisement

Access e-books

More By Supreme Court of New York

People State New York v. Bernard J. Magee

Sandra Baker v. City New York

People State New York v. Peter Andreu

People State New York v. Donald J. Nicholson

People State New York v. Namon Ates

People State New York v. Mark R. Schoonmaker

Karen S. "Anonymous" v. Thomas Streitferdt

John F. Sullivan v. Board Education Eastchester Union Free School District Et Al.

People State New York v. Dominick Cappolla

Thomas H. Eddy v. Syracuse University

Therese R. Fischer v. Erich A. Fischer

Daniel M. Antonovich v. Mira Antonovich

People State New York v. Theodore Mosher

People State New York v. Wayne Oates

People State New York v. Robert F. Garrow

People State New York v. Ronald J. Trucchio

Ken Leistner v. Dian J. Leistner

Matter William M. Kunstler v. Thomas B. Galligan

People State New York v. Ferdinand Valero

Westchester County Correction Officers Benevolent Association Inc. v. County Westchester

Matter Louis S. Sellstrom v. City Rye Et Al.

Veronica Richardson v. John A. Martorano Et Al.

People State New York v. Hardaway Heaton

People State New York v. Wilfredo Ortiz

Elaine Schempp v. City New York

Joseph Chyrywaty v. Carol A. Chyrywaty

People State New York v. Gary Perfetto

State Division Human Rights Et Al. v. Monroe County Department Social Services Et Al.

Sterling National Bank & Trust Company New York v. I. S. A. Merchandising Corp. Et Al.

Stephen Blaize Et Al. v. City New York Et Al.

Great Neck Car Care Center v. Artpat Auto Repair Corp.

Herbert Plaut v. Hgh Partnership

People State New York v. Richard Bellach

Banco Espanol De Credito v. Pierre S. Du Pont

People State New York v. Eloy Bernal

Eddington Mduba v. Benedictine Hospital

People State New York v. Barry Coker

Jack Durant v. Trans World Airlines

Benjamin Shapiro v. Marstone Distributors

Karin Drazin v. Louis Drazin

Kathleen Mcgowan v. James F. Mcgowan

James Kiker v. Nassau County

Matter James Munnelly v. Town East Hampton

Angelo Pioli v. Morgan Guaranty Trust Company New York

Nolah Blades v. Franklin General Hospital

Ann Leyva v. Abraham Levy

Jerrold Bell Et Al. v. Shopwell

Bernard Hohenberg Et Al. v. 77 West 55th Street Associates Et Al.

Tsirulnik v. Botton

Brennan v. Metropolitan Opera Association