Albert v. Haimes
New York Supreme Court
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
- Gordon v. EllimanNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
- Briskin v. GlickmanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967
- Blattberg v. WeissNew York Supreme Court · 1969
3Cited by9 opinions
- Scholastic, Inc. And Scholastic Productions, Inc. v. Robert Harris and Harris Entertainment, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Curley v. Brignoli, Curley & Roberts AssociatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Golden Tee, Inc. v. Venture Golf Schools, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- Weber v. KingDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2000
- Kenworthy v. HargroveDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.