Legal Opinion

McCarthy v. Young

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 30, 2008PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Accepting the allegations of the complaint as true, according the plaintiffs the benefit of every favorable inference, and determining only whether the facts alleged “fit within any cognizable legal theory” (Sokoloff v Harriman Estates Dev. Corp., 96 NY2d 409, 414 [2001]; see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]), the complaint sets forth a cognizable cause of action to recover damages for breach of contract against the defendant Steven W. Young, doing business as Steven W. Young, G.C. The subject contract did not clearly state that it was entered into between the plaintiffs and the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Leon v. MartinezNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
  2. Sokoloff v. Harriman Estates Development Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
  3. Shaya B. Pacific, LLC v. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, LLPAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  4. Metropolitan Switch Board Co. v. Amici Associates Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Clendeninn v. YoungAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2026
  2. Vitale v. RowlandAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API