From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

300 Bwy. Realty Corp. v. Kommit

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County
Jul 9, 1962
37 Misc. 2d 325 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1962)

Opinion

July 9, 1962

Arthur J. Harvey and Edward A. McMahon for defendant.

Gordon Marshall for plaintiff.


Defendant moves pursuant to subdivision 4 of rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice to dismiss the complaint herein on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.

The gravamen of the complaint is for an accounting. The complaint in an equitable action for an accounting must show: (1) relations of a mutual and confidential nature; (2) money or property entrusted to the defendant imposing upon him the burden of accounting; (3) that there is no adequate legal remedy; and (4), in some cases, a demand for an accounting and a refusal (4 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice, p. 275).

As indicated, among other things, the complaint must show that the defendant has been entrusted with property of the plaintiff and, in consequence, to have become bound to reveal his dealings with it ( Schantz v. Oakman, 163 N.Y. 148, 157; Fur Wool Trading Co. v. George I. Fox, Inc., 245 N.Y. 215; Tyndall v. Pinelawn Cemetery, 198 N.Y. 217, 219-220; Hamilton v. Patrolmen's Benevolent Assn., 276 App. Div. 863; Jacobson v. Freedman Slater, 275 App. Div. 631, 633; Rubenstein v. Small, 273 App. Div. 102, 104; Silverman v. Bob, 253 App. Div. 303, 305; New Yorkers Producing Corp. v. Moss, 237 App. Div. 567, 569; Talmudic Literature Publishers v. Lewin, 226 App. Div. 1, 2; Reinhard v. Reinhard, 56 N.Y.S.2d 160, 161-162; Rush v. Rush, 144 Misc. 489, 491-492; Kenefick v. Co-Operative Bldg. Bank, 62 Misc. 519, 522; 4 Carmody-Wait, New York Practice, p. 277).

The complaint here does not allege that defendant has been entrusted with or come into possession of property of the plaintiff. The following rules are too well recognized to require the citing of authority: that a pleading attacked for insufficiency must be construed liberally and broadly and is entitled to every fair inference and intendment; that, upon such a motion, the court accepts as true the material allegations of fact contained in the complaint and the reasonable inferences that may be drawn therefrom; and that, if in any aspect upon the facts stated the plaintiff is entitled to a recovery, the motion should be denied. However, it is also the law that ultimate facts and not legal conclusions must be pleaded (Civ. Prac. Act, § 241; Didier v. Macfadden Pubs., 299 N.Y. 49, 53; Kalmanash v. Smith, 291 N.Y. 142, 154; Lifshutz v. Adams, 285 N.Y. 180, 185; Gerdes v. Reynolds, 281 N.Y. 180, 183-185; Swacker v. Moody, 5 A.D.2d 836). The allegation in paragraph "THIRTY-EIGHTH" of the complaint that defendant "did profit personally" is not an allegation of fact that he has been entrusted with property of the plaintiff.

Motion granted, with leave to plaintiff to serve an amended complaint within 20 days after service of the order to be entered herein with notice of entry.


Summaries of

300 Bwy. Realty Corp. v. Kommit

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County
Jul 9, 1962
37 Misc. 2d 325 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1962)
Case details for

300 Bwy. Realty Corp. v. Kommit

Case Details

Full title:300 BROADWAY REALTY CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. LESTER KOMMIT, Defendant

Court:Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County

Date published: Jul 9, 1962

Citations

37 Misc. 2d 325 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1962)
235 N.Y.S.2d 205

Citing Cases

Technology in Partnership, Inc. v. Rudin

5. Accounting A party seeking an accounting must meet four requirements: "(1) relations of a mutual and…

Tech. in P'ship, Inc. v. Rudin

A party seeking an accounting must meet four requirements: "(1) relations of a mutual and confidential…