§Why CasetextPricing

In the Matter of the Estate of Edmund Felix Hennel, Also Known as Edmund Hennel, Deceased. Gregory Hennel et al., Respondents; Hazel Hennel, as Executor of the Estate of Edmund Felix Hennel, Deceased, Appellant.

Brief

14 Cited authorities

  1. Castellotti v. Free

    138 A.D.3d 198 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016)   Cited 143 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the mere fact of a familial relationship by itself does not establish a fiduciary relationship

  2. Fleet Bank v. Pine Knoll Corp.

    290 A.D.2d 792 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 118 times
    Holding that motion to dismiss negligent misrepresentation counterclaim was properly denied

  3. Rogers v. Town of Islip

    230 A.D.2d 727 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)   Cited 73 times
    Requiring clear and unambiguous promise

  4. Steele v. Delverde

    242 A.D.2d 414 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)   Cited 56 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

  5. Swerdloff v. Mobil Oil

    74 A.D.2d 258 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)   Cited 74 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

  6. R. Freedman Son, Inc. v. A.I. Credit Corp.

    226 A.D.2d 1002 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)   Cited 23 times
    Distinguishing a false "promise to perform in the future," which does not state a claim for fraud, with an "intentional misrepresentation of the present state of affairs," which does state a claim for fraud

  7. Mandel v. Liebman

    303 N.Y. 88 (N.Y. 1951)   Cited 110 times
    Rejecting affirmative defense that contract was void because it violates § 172 of Article 11

  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. Cohen v. Brown, Harris, Stevens, Inc.

    64 N.Y.2d 728 (N.Y. 1984)   Cited 14 times

    Decided December 20, 1984 Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Richard W. Wallach, J. John Van Der Tuin for appellants. M. William Scherer for respondents. MEMORANDUM. The judgment appealed from and the order of the Appellate Division brought up for review with it should be affirmed, with costs. This case involves a dispute over two rooms in the building located at 180 East 79th Street in Manhattan in which plaintiffs own a residential cooperative apartment. Plaintiffs have rented the

  10. Buddman Distributors v. Labatt Importers

    91 A.D.2d 838 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)   Cited 7 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