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.
J. Bartow McCALL, as Executor of William L. Chapman, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Jonathan LEADER, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered on or about May 7, 1998, after a nonjury trial, in defendants' favor, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
In this action by a one-third shareholder alleging, inter alia, that defendant Leader misappropriated funds rightfully belonging either to the subject corporation, Liberty Capital Management, Inc. (LCM), or to plaintiff, the trial court properly found that, since plaintiff's decedent had himself benefitted from abrogation of the salary limitation contained in the parties' letter agreement, plaintiff was estopped from enforcing such limitation against defendant Leader (see, Diamond v. Diamond, 307 N.Y. 263, 120 N.E.2d 819). Moreover, the evidence showed that abrogation of the salary limitation was retroactively authorized by a proper vote of the LCM shareholders. Also proper was the trial court's finding, premised upon the testimony of experts, that the compensation paid Leader by LCM was reasonable in light of his substantial services to the corporation (cf., Wilderman v. Wilderman, 315 A.2d 610 [Del.] ). Finally, as the trial court found, plaintiff was not entitled to prevail upon his claim for conversion of corporate stock since he failed to meet his burden to adduce evidence of damages attributable to the alleged conversion (see, Veeco Instruments, Inc. v. Candido, 70 Misc.2d 333, 336, 334 N.Y.S.2d 321).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: January 04, 2000
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)