ARONOW v. SOMMER

As in Transp. Group Mgrs. v. Held_( 166 A.D.2d 222), the alleged joint venture herein was stymied in the achievement of its specific purpose, i.e., the acquisition and development of a casino, by the "intense animus between the parties" in March of 1994. Although plaintiffs had been warned that the casino owners wanted to close an additional round of bidding by April of 1994, they allowed several months to pass without any attempt to communicate with their alleged co-venturer. A party's silence after a repudiation can demonstrate the abandonment of a joint venture (see, e.g.,Allen Co. v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., 382 F. Supp. 1052, 1060-1061, affd 519 F.2d 788), and that is the only interpretation that can reasonably be given the facts at bar. Accordingly, the referee properly held, as a matter of law, that the joint venture had already terminated in June of 1994, at the start of the process by which defendant Trust eventually acquired the casino. Plaintiff's claims then, all of which depend upon the continued existence of the alleged joint partnership and the fiduciary relationships arising therefrom, were properly dismissed. We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.