From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Karl v. Mobil Oil Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 9, 1982
90 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

November 9, 1982

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Cattaraugus County, Crowley, J.

Present — Hancock, Jr., J.P., Doerr, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ.


Order unanimously modified in accordance with memorandum, with costs to defendant, and, as modified, affirmed. Motion to strike material from respondent's brief denied. Memorandum: The motion to add a new cause of action for fraud by service of a supplemental complaint should have been denied because that cause of action is palpably insufficient. The contract for the sale of gasoline by the defendant to the plaintiff expressly provides that "[q]uantities shall be computed without temperature adjustment." The failure of defendant to inform plaintiff that defendant's supplier, in billing defendant, made an allowance for shrinkage due to temperature, does not constitute fraud by concealment, since defendant was under no obligation to reveal this information (see 24 N.Y. Jur, Fraud and Deceit, § 114). That portion of the supplemental complaint alleging additional deliveries of gasoline and additional shortages after the service of the original complaint is proper. The order appealed from should be modified by deleting the first and second ordering paragraphs and ordering instead that the plaintiff is granted leave to serve a supplemental complaint supplementing the cause of action set forth in the original complaint and that the plaintiff is denied leave to serve a supplemental complaint containing the new cause of action alleged in paragraphs 3 through 13 (and paragraph 2 of the "Wherefore" clause) of the proposed supplemental complaint.


Summaries of

Karl v. Mobil Oil Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 9, 1982
90 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Karl v. Mobil Oil Company

Case Details

Full title:JACOB KARL, Doing Business as JAKE'S FRIENDLY SERVICE, Respondent, v…

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

Date published: Nov 9, 1982

Citations

90 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)

Citing Cases

Edison Stone Corp. v. 42nd Street Development Corp.

(Reno v Bull, 226 N.Y. 546, 550; cf., Channel Master Corp. v Aluminum Ltd. Sales, 4 N.Y.2d 403.) Any claim…