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.
R & R CAPITAL LLC, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Linda MERRITT, etc., Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered August 12, 2008, which granted defendant's motion for disbursement of proceeds of the sale of certain property located in Pennsylvania, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion denied.
The motion court did not have jurisdiction over plaintiff's claim for a final accounting of the proceeds of the sale of the Pennsylvania property at issue, which was the sole asset of a limited liability corporation in which plaintiffs and defendant were equal members. Although plaintiffs initially commenced this action in New York relating to defendant's alleged mismanagement of several limited liability corporations, the claims were heard and dismissed after a nonjury trial.
Defendant subsequently sold the property at issue and plaintiff commenced an action in Pennsylvania for, inter alia, a final accounting based on the sale of the property and defendant's alleged mishandling of the proceeds. The Pennsylvania court placed the proceeds of the sale in escrow pending a determination by Supreme Court, New York County regarding how the funds should be disbursed and defendant moved the court for disbursement of the funds pursuant to a schedule submitted with the motion.
The motion court, in granting the motion and permitting the disbursements sought by defendant with limited exceptions, lacked jurisdiction over plaintiff's claims, since the relief sought did not relate to a cause of action raised in the initial complaint, nor was the issue involved previously litigated in this action (see P.A. Bldg. Co. v. City of New York, 236 A.D.2d 275, 653 N.Y.S.2d 340 [1997]; Ward-Carpenter Engrs. v. Sassower, 193 A.D.2d 730, 598 N.Y.S.2d 534 [1993] ).
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: March 19, 2009
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)