AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
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
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Eduard GITLIN, etc., et al., appellants, v. Alex CHIRINKIN, et al., respondents.

Barbara Lee Ford, Floral Park, N.Y., for appellants. Feinstein & Partners, PLLC, New York, N.Y. (Albert Feinstein of counsel), for respondents.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and unjust enrichment, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), entered December 19, 2012, which granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint as barred by the doctrine of in pari delicto.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the second amended complaint as barred by the doctrine of in pari delicto ( see Kirschner v. KPMG LLP, 15 N.Y.3d 446, 464, 912 N.Y.S.2d 508, 938 N.E.2d 941; Ta Chun Wang v. Chun Wong, 163 A.D.2d 300, 302, 557 N.Y.S.2d 434; Janke v. Janke, 47 A.D.2d 445, 449, 366 N.Y.S.2d 910, affd. 39 N.Y.2d 786, 385 N.Y.S.2d 286, 350 N.E.2d 617).

The plaintiffs' remaining contentions are without merit. ENG, P.J., DILLON, DUFFY and BARROS, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Gitlin v. Chirinkin
(Oct 22, 2014)