Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

WILLIAM KUNTZ, III, et al., Plaintiffs, v. LAKE PLACID OLYMPIC ORGANIZING COMMITTEE OF 1980, INC., et al., Defendants

JOSEPH HARRIS, J.

Defendant, New York Telephone Company, moves for dismissal of plaintiffs' action, pursuant to CPLR 3012 (b), for plaintiffs' failure to serve a complaint on demand.

Plaintiffs commenced the instant action, seeking damages for breach of contract, breach of implied contract, restraint of trade and commerce, and R.I.C.O., by service of a summons on defendant New York Telephone Company on April 4, 1990. On April 20, 1990, defendant served plaintiffs with a demand for a complaint. Despite further inquiries by the defendant, plaintiffs have failed to serve a complaint in compliance with defendant's demand.

Plaintiffs contend that they are not obligated to serve a complaint in that defendant is precluded from moving to dismiss plaintiffs' action by the automatic stay in bankruptcy.

In 1988, plaintiff Drax Services, Ltd./Westrail filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. Plaintiff One Westminister Co., Inc. has apparently filed for chapter 11 reorganization. On March 29, 1990 plaintiffs filed a notice to creditors of automatic stay with the Albany County Clerk's office.

Contrary to plaintiffs' position, the automatic stay imposed by 11 U.S.C. § 362 (a) is inapplicable to suits by a bankrupt or debtor (see, Martin-Trigona v Champion Fed. Sav. Loan Assn., 892 F.2d 575; In re Berry Estates v State of New York, 812 F.2d 67), and does not bar a defendant in a debtor's suit from seeking dismissal of that suit (Martin-Trigona v Champion Fed. Sav. Loan Assn., supra).

Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, defendant New York Telephone Company's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' action is granted.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KUNTZ v. OLYMPIC ORG. COMM
(Oct 3, 1990)