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.
GLOBAL MINERALS AND METALS CORP., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered November 15, 2002, dismissing plaintiff's complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered October 18, 2002, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) and (7), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff Global Minerals and Metals Corp. (GMMC) commenced this action against Merrill Lynch and some of its affiliates (collectively, Merrill) alleging that from 1994 through July 1996, Merrill misappropriated copper warrants via an account GMMC had with Merrill. The record reflects, however, that the subject account was actually held by a third party, Sumitomo Corporation, and that, as authorized by a limited power of attorney signed by a representative of each GMMC and Sumitomo, GMMC could make trades in the account as Sumitomo's agent. The record further establishes that in a May 23, 2000 settlement agreement, Sumitomo, “for itself ․ and for its agents, representatives, [etc.]” agreed to accept from Merrill money in exchange for the release of any claims against Merrill “relating in any way to copper trading.” That agreement explicitly stated, “Merrill Lynch will have no liability to any person in connection with [Sumitomo's] copper losses.” In view of this evidence, the IAS court properly rejected GMMC's assertions that it was the real party in interest in this matter (see Maas v. Cornell Univ., 94 N.Y.2d 87, 91, 699 N.Y.S.2d 716, 721 N.E.2d 966; compare, Watts v. Phillips-Jones Corp., 211 App.Div. 523, 526-529, 207 N.Y.S. 493, affd. 242 N.Y. 557, 152 N.E. 425). In view of the foregoing, we need not reach plaintiff's other contentions.
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: June 19, 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)