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.
Richard H. WILLETT, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. LINCOLNSHIRE MANAGEMENT, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered July 10, 2001, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on his conversion cause of action and dismissed defendants' first, third, sixth and seventh affirmative defenses, and judgment, same court and Justice, entered April 23, 2002, which awarded plaintiff $881,037 plus interest, unanimously affirmed, with one bill of costs.
The IAS court properly granted plaintiff summary judgment on his conversion claim against defendant Lincolnshire Management, Inc. (LMI). It is undisputed that LMI, in its role of managing agent of defendant Lincolnshire Equity Fund, L.P. (The Fund), withheld substantial distributions owed to plaintiff by The Fund. LMI's affirmative defense, that it properly withheld the distributions due plaintiff to offset a substantial obligation owed from plaintiff to LMI, was properly dismissed. The obligation purportedly owing from plaintiff to LMI is currently being disputed and “there is no right to set off a possible, unliquidated liability against a liquidated claim that is due and payable” (Spodek v. Park Prop. Dev. Assocs., 263 A.D.2d 478, 478-479, 693 N.Y.S.2d 199; see also New Haven Props. Ltd. v. Grinberg, 293 A.D.2d 386, 741 N.Y.S.2d 206). The IAS court also properly dismissed the affirmative defenses that LMI's actions were justified in the interests of equity and that plaintiff's conversion claim was barred by the doctrines of estoppel and unclean hands since there was no evidence of wrongdoing by plaintiff.
We have considered defendants' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 20, 2003
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)