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.
MORRI N.Y. FOODS CORP., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Leonard DeFILIPPO, Individually and Doing Business as Amity Wholesale, Defendant-Appellant.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered March 23, 2006, which, in denying plaintiff's motion for appointment of a temporary receiver, directed defendant to deposit all receivables from funds or credit extended by the plaintiff in a separate corporate bank account, and denied defendant's cross motion to dismiss this action pending completion of discovery, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The denial of defendant's cross motion, without prejudice to renewal, is appealable (see Moleon v. Kreisler Borg Florman Gen. Constr. Co., 304 A.D.2d 337, 339, 758 N.Y.S.2d 621 [2003] ). Defendant sought dismissal on the grounds that documentary evidence demonstrated all transactions in issue involved only the corporate entity of which he was the sole shareholder and director, and that he had no personal involvement in the disputed transactions. There was evidence, however, that receivables due to the corporation, in many instances, did not pass through it, but rather were collected by defendant individually, and commissions earned by the corporation were also paid directly to him or his wife.
The court appropriately directed the parties each to set up a bank account to deposit all receivables derived from funds or credit extended by the opposing party. Such moneys were specifically identifiable, and their loss was likely during the pendency of the action, as evident from defendant's averments that he was spending such funds for separate business needs (see CPLR 6401 [a]; Meurer v. Meurer, 21 A.D.2d 778, 250 N.Y.S.2d 817 [1964] ).
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: November 02, 2006
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)