Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Dion FRIEDLAND, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Charles C. HICKOX, Defendant-Respondent, HBLS, LLP, et al., Defendants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered January 2, 2007, which denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on his second, third, fourth and sixth causes of action and for entry of a judgment against defendant Charles C. Hickox in the amount of $2,695,092, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff seeks to recover from Hickox, a limited partner in limited partnership defendant HBLS who allegedly owes a debt to HBLS in the amount of a deficiency judgment it obtained against HBLS. Based upon the partnership documents, audited financial statements and security agreement with U.S. Trust, as well as depositions taken in prior actions and affidavits submitted on this motion, the court properly found that issues of fact exist, not only as to whether Hickox's required capital contribution to the limited partnership was waived in its entirety in exchange for his posting personal assets as collateral for a loan by U.S. Trust to the limited partnership, but also whether the return of the collateral to Hickox was either a return or distribution of a capital contribution so as to entitle plaintiff to receipt of the collateral as payment of the limited partnership's debt to him (see CPLR 5227; Revised Limited Partnership Act § 121-502, § 121-607; Matter of Trustco Bank, N.A. v. Strong, 261 A.D.2d 25, 27, 699 N.Y.S.2d 805 [1999] ).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: December 11, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)