§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of McIver-Morgan, Inc., Respondent,v.Christopher Dal Piaz, et al., Appellants.

Brief

6 Cited authorities

  1. Charlebois v. Weller Assocs

    72 N.Y.2d 587 (N.Y. 1988)   Cited 96 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Disallowing quantum meruit recovery on the same grounds

  2. McIver-Morgan, Inc. v. Piaz

    108 A.D.3d 47 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 6 times
    Affirming contract arbitration award in favor of firm that “specializ[ed] in all facets of high-end residential interior design and architectural services,” even though the firm was not a professional corporation and had no license to practice architecture, because the firm engaged as a consultant a licensed and registered architect who “had a substantive, active role in the provision of architectural services,” and because the law requiring a license to practice architecture was not to be “ ‘slavishly applied’ ”

  3. People v. Merriweather

    135 Misc. 2d 998 (N.Y. Dist. Ct. 1987)   Cited 5 times

    June 12, 1987 George Nager, P.C., for defendant. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General, for plaintiff. MARVIN E. SEGAL, J. The defendant's motion to dismiss the information against the defendant on the grounds that the said violations as charged against the defendant are unconstitutionally vague and incapable of enforcement is denied for the following reasons: The defendant herein was charged with violating section 6513 (1) of the Education Law, unauthorized use of a professional title, to wit, "architect"

  4. Vitanza v. City of New York

    48 A.D.2d 41 (N.Y. App. Div. 1975)   Cited 9 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Vitanza v City of New York (48 A.D.2d 41, 44, affd 40 N.Y.2d 872), a case which dealt with the provisions of the General City Law and the provisions of the Administrative Code of the City of New York which regulated plumbers, this Court stated that "one licensed as a plumber in one community may not recover under a contract for plumbing work performed in a neighboring community where he holds no license" (Vitanza v. City of New York, supra, at 44, citing Wexler v. Rust, 144 App. Div. 296; see also, Meguin v. Kramer, 49 Misc.2d 572).

  5. Nu-Brass Plumbing Heating v. Wiener

    29 A.D.2d 172 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)   Cited 3 times

    January 25, 1968. Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County, WILFRED A. WALTEMADE, J. Ralph H. Wiener for appellants. Donald F. Mohr of counsel ( Schutzer Mohr, attorneys), for respondent. STEUER, J. While we are in accord with the decision of Special Term and with the reasons assigned by the learned court, the unusual situation and problem presented call for some notice. Plaintiff sues for the balance due on a written contract for plumbing work. We agree with the conclusion that no issue is presented

  6. Johnston v. Dahlgren

    166 N.Y. 354 (N.Y. 1901)   Cited 56 times
    Holding that, while plaintiff plumbers “were disabled from compelling payment for work performed by them in violation of the statute, the defendant had the benefit of the work they had performed and having paid for it,” defendant's payment could not be taken back