Legal Opinion

Albert v. Haimes

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 6, 1970PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCharles Margett, J.

The fundamental question presented in this motion to dismiss the complaint for legal insufficiency is whether limited partners may institute a class or representa*609tive action in a suit for accounting, fraud, conspiracy to commit fraud, balance due on a lease, and money due a partnersMp as capital contribution. The defendants contend the complaint should be dismissed on the grounds that: (1) plaintiffs, as limited partners, have no right to bring a class action; (2) an action for an accounting without a dissolution of a partnership is not authorized by law or by the terms of the partnership…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Gordon v. EllimanNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  2. Briskin v. GlickmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967
  3. Blattberg v. WeissNew York Supreme Court · 1969

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Scholastic, Inc. And Scholastic Productions, Inc. v. Robert Harris and Harris Entertainment, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
  2. Curley v. Brignoli, Curley & Roberts AssociatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
  3. Golden Tee, Inc. v. Venture Golf Schools, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
  4. Weber v. KingDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2000
  5. Kenworthy v. HargroveDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API