Legal Opinion

LaVigne v. Feinbloom

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

Decided November 13, 1998No. Appeal No. 1PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint. We reject defendants’ contention that Business Corporation Law § 630 (a) does not apply. On a motion to dismiss, the allegations in the complaint must be deemed true, and plaintiffs must be afforded all favorable inferences that may be drawn from the complaint (see, Underpinning & Found. Constructors v Chase Manhattan Bank, 46 NY2d 459, 462). In December 1989 Health Information Technologies, Inc. filed a certificate of incorporation in New York State, and in May…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Underpinning & Foundation Constructors, Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.New York Court of Appeals · 1979
  2. Armstrong v. Dyer, HobbyNew York Court of Appeals · 1935

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Stuto v. KerberNew York Supreme Court · 2009
  2. LaVigne v. FeinbloomAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API