CHAUDHRY v. ABADIR (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

M. Rashid CHAUDHRY, et al., respondents, v. Adel R. ABADIR, et al., appellants.

Decided: May 17, 1999

SONDRA MILLER, J.P., CORNELIUS J. O'BRIEN, DAVID S. RITTER and DANIEL F. LUCIANO, JJ.

Goodkind Labaton Rudoff & Sucharow, L.L.P., New York, N.Y. (Joseph H. Einstein of counsel), for appellants. Coleman & Rhine, L.L.P., New York, N.Y. (Ira Daniel Tokayer of counsel), for respondents.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud and conversion, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nastasi, J.), entered September 23, 1998, which denied their motion pursuant to CPLR 3016 to dismiss the first cause of action contained in the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Upon our review of the complaint and all of the allegations subsumed under the first cause of action, we agree with the Supreme Court that it was not lacking in sufficient detail (see, CPLR 3016[b] ) and provides the defendants with notice of the transactions intended to be proven and the elements of the claims (see, CPLR 3013). Accordingly, the defendants' motion to dismiss the first cause of action was properly denied (see generally, Foley v. D'Agostino, 21 A.D.2d 60, 64-65, 248 N.Y.S.2d 121; see also, Components Direct v. European Am. Bank & Trust Co., 175 A.D.2d 227, 232, 572 N.Y.S.2d 359).

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

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Out of date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!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

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.

Go To Learn About The Law