9 Cited authorities

  1. Castellotti v. Free

    138 A.D.3d 198 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)   Cited 85 times
    Holding that the mere fact of a familial relationship by itself does not establish a fiduciary relationship
  2. Steele v. Delverde

    242 A.D.2d 414 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)   Cited 53 times

    September 4, 1997 Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Stephen Crane, J.). Briefly stated, it is plaintiff's contention that he and appellants had an oral agreement by which plaintiff was to be appellants' exclusive United States agent for a period of two years for the sale of appellants' food products manufactured in Italy. There was no written agreement between the parties to this effect, and it is undisputed that various draft agreements were rejected by plaintiff. Several months after

  3. Philo Smith Co., Inc. v. Uslife Corp.

    554 F.2d 34 (2d Cir. 1977)   Cited 97 times
    Affirming district court's dismissal of promissory estoppel claim barred by the Statute of Frauds because plaintiff's injury, the loss of a finder fee commission, was "solely a result of the non-performance of a void agreement" and "not the kind of injury contemplated by New York law" as falling within the unconscionability exception
  4. Swerdloff v. Mobil Oil

    74 A.D.2d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)   Cited 70 times
    Finding no unconscionability where a gasstation manager worked "endless hours" in reliance on the oral promise of his own dealership if he retracted his resignation
  5. Melwani v. Jain

    281 A.D.2d 276 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 29 times

    March 20, 2001. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered November 5, 1999, which, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff's causes of action for breach of contract, promissory estoppel and fraudulent inducement, unanimously affirmed, without costs. PrakashMelwani, for pro Se. Nicholas P. Otis, for defendants-respondents-appellants. Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Tom, Ellerin, Rubin, Buckley, JJ. The alleged oral agreement, under which defendants were to pay plaintiff a royalty during

  6. Mandel v. Liebman

    303 N.Y. 88 (N.Y. 1951)   Cited 104 times
    Rejecting affirmative defense that contract was void because it violates § 172 of Article 11
  7. Brown v. Crown Equipment Corp.

    554 F.3d 34 (1st Cir. 2009)   Cited 1 times

    Nos. 06-2705, 06-2706. Heard July 30, 2007. Decided January 28, 2009. Appeal from the District of Maine David M. Cohen, United States Magistrate Judge. Jeffrey F. Peck with whom Ulmer Berne, LLP, John A.K. Grunert and Campbell, Campbell, Edwards Conroy, P.C. were on brief for appellant/cross-appellee. Jonathan S. Franklin, Kimberly S. Walker, Fulbright Jaworski L.L.P., Robin S. Conrad and Amar D. Sarwal, National Chamber Litigation Center, Inc., on brief for International Association of Defense Counsel

  8. WE Transport, Inc. v. Suffolk Transportation Service, Inc.

    192 A.D.2d 601 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)   Cited 11 times

    April 12, 1993 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Lama, J.). Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. The plaintiff WE Transport, Inc. (hereinafter WE Transport) entered into a written subcontract agreement with the defendant Suffolk Transportation Service Corp. (hereinafter Suffolk) to provide busing services on behalf of Suffolk for the Brentwood Union Free School District for the 1986-1987 school year. During the 1987-1988, 1988-1989, and 1989-1990 school years, WE Transport

  9. Buddman Distributors v. Labatt Importers

    91 A.D.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)   Cited 6 times

    December 17, 1982 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Kuszynski, J. Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Schnepp, JJ. Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Defendant, Labatt Importers, appeals from an order denying its motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of the Statute of Frauds (CPLR 3211, subd [a], par 5). The complaint, liberally construed, alleges an oral contract whereby the defendant gave the plaintiff the right to distribute defendant's products