David Kassel, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. James P. Donohue, etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants, James Lynch, etc., et al., Defendants. (2015)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

David Kassel, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. James P. Donohue, etc., et al., Defendants–Appellants, James Lynch, etc., et al., Defendants.

1498 8

Decided: April 30, 2015

Acosta, J.P., Saxe, DeGrasse, Richter, JJ.

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, New York (Philip Touitou of counsel), for appellants. Thomas D. Shanahan, P.C., New York (Thomas D. Shanahan of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered August 26, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants James P. Donohue and Crystal and Donohue's motion to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint as against James P. Donohue and Crystal and Donohue.

The allegations in the complaint reflect plaintiff's dissatisfaction with defendants' strategic choices and tactics in the conduct of the arbitration; there is no showing that those choices and tactics were unreasonable (see Rosner v. Paley, 65 N.Y.2d 736, 738 [1985]; Pouncy v. Solotaroff, 100 AD3d 410 [1st Dept 2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 857 [2013]; Dweck Law Firm v. Mann, 283 A.D.2d 292 [1st Dept 2001] ).

CLERK

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network