Legal Opinion
Doo v. Berger
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided May 13, 1996PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In an action, *436inter alia, to recover damages for unjust enrichment, (1) the plaintiff David Doo appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated May 15, 1995, as granted those branches of the defendants’ motion which were to dismiss all of the causes of action except the claim sounding in unjust enrichment, and (2) the defendants cross-appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of the same order as failed to grant their motion to dismiss the complaint in its entirety.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v. Long Island Rail RoadNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Metropolitan Electric Manufacturing Co. v. Herbert Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Michalic v. KlatAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Koncelik v. AbadyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Deni v. Air NiagaraAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lane v. Fein, Such and Crane, LLPDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2011
- Griffin v. AnslowAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- New York Tile Wholesale Corp. v. Thomas Fatato Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Asamblea De Iglesias Christianas, Inc. v. DeVitoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022