Search Results

but not the agreement itself.” 10 Gilat involved a claim that defendants interfered with plaintiff’s rights In essence, plaintiff maintained that defendants were depriving her of her rights, including the right not challenge that her husband had entered the Partnership Agreement and that she sought to enforce rights

There, the Court recognized that “ voluntary payment of money under a claim of right cannot in general The element of coercion is essential to the right.” Gimbels displayed a marked lack of diligence in determining what its contractual rights were, and is Prior to the hearing, Overbay exercised its right of redemption (the right to pay off the debt prior because Plaintiff paid the Liquidation Fee “without any contemporaneous objections or reservation of rights

Akl University Hill concerned an “Exclusive Right to Sell Agreement” regarding property in Syracuse. The contract granted plaintiff, a real estate broker, the sole and exclusive right to sell the property plaintiff was granted, pursuant to a written listing agreement on plaintiff’s letterhead, the exclusive right

In opposition to defendant’s motion, plaintiff unsuccessfully argued that defendant waived his right The Court held that “[a]lthough a party may waive it [sic] rights under CPLR 3215(c) by serving an answer

The remedy is frequently used to enforce rights under a real estate contract, where monetary damages delivered seller offered “ the choice of either accepting such title as the was able to convey, with a credit Purchaser, nevertheless, may elect to accept such title as Seller may be able to convey without any credit properly granted summary judgment to the seller on its counterclaim because the seller “acted within its rights

Where “a copy of the agreement is annexed to and made a part of the complaint, the rights and duties the complaint, and not by the plaintiff’s characterization or construction thereof in his pleading he rights Thus, TIA’s rights arise out of the contract annexed to its complaint and it is bound by the contract

among others, WP’s managing member, CSPNA, and WP, “jointly and severally, from any and all claims, rights just an extension of plaintiffs’ over-arching complaint: that defendants refused to accord them the rights negotiations conducted at arm’s length through separate counsel, and a proposed Release that recognized WP’s right

“To counterbalance the ease with which a party may hinder another’s right to transfer property” the law In light of RPAPL § 1331, in certain circumstances, strict application of the “no second chance” rule

not violate Judiciary Law § 489(1), as a matter of law, when the “purpose in taking assignment of … rights explained that “the critical issue” in assessing champerty is the purpose behind the acquisition of rights subsequently executed an assignment agreement on May 9, 2012, in which Rio assigned to IKB AG “all the rights equal to the proceeds of any recovery stemming from a resolution of claims relating to the Assigned Rights the assignment must be “to make money from litigating it” for it to be champertous. 19 “ cquir a right

These scams also sometimes involve “catfishing,” where fraudsters might set up fake online identities They might run advertisements or add targets to a group chat that the target didn’t seek to join. They might offer financial advice or express romantic interest. The OCEO said that the fraudster “might even suggest meeting in person but then come up with excuses Fraudsters might then ask their targets to invest larger sums of money.

action for conversion, a plaintiff is required to allege that they had legal ownership or a “superior right of possession” and that the defendant interfered with their right of possession. 7 A plaintiff states Plaintiffs claimed that “ t all relevant times, had a possessory right and interest in the electronic that the following allegations sufficed to state a claim for conversion: plaintiffs “had a possessory right found that there was “no case law to support the proposition that one 50% owner has the unfettered right

This is so because in “adjudicating the rights of parties to a contract, courts may not fashion a new In the event the landlord was unable to timely obtain all approvals, the tenant had the right to terminate The Court rejected landlord’s contention that “in light of the provisions of the lease which required