Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

NEWMAN v. BERKOWITZ

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.
Apr 22, 2008
Important Paras
Please sign up to view Important Paras.

This breach of contract action should have been dismissed because defendant, as an individual, was not a party to the contract. Read as a whole, the letter agreement, which was drafted on the letterhead of defendant's professional corporation and included a schedule indicating that legal fees were to be shared between plaintiff and defendant's professional corporation, shows that the intended party was the corporation. The absence of a reference to a corporate office above or below defendant's personal signature does not prove otherwise ( see 150 Broadway NY. Assoc. L.P. v Bodner, 14 AD3d 1, 7; PNC Capital Recovery v Mechanical Parking Sys., 283 AD2d 268, 270-271, lv dismissed 96 NY2d 937, appeal dismissed 98 NY2d 763).

Conduct is frivolous if "it is completely without merit in law and cannot be supported by a reasonable argument for an extension, modification or reversal of existing law" ( 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [c]). The court properly found that defendant's motion for reargument was frivolous, since defendant was unable to articulate a legal ground for it, and followed proper procedure in imposing the sanction against him ( see Spinnell v Toshiba Am. Consumer Prods., 239 AD2d 175).