Mainline Elec. Corp. v. East Quogue Union Free Sch. Dist., 896 N.E.2d 91 (NY 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
Mainline Elec. Corp. v. East Quogue Union Free Sch. Dist., 896 N.E.2d 91 (NY 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events (6 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Calabrese Bakeries, Inc. v. Rockland Bakery, Inc. (nyappdiv, 2013-01-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Calabrese Bakeries, Inc. v. Rockland Bakery, Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
As such, this matter falls within the general rule that where the parties chart a “course “to conduct business through a corporation, . . . they are not at one and the same time joint venturers and stockholders, fiduciaries and nonfiduciaries, personally liable and not personally liable” (Weisman v Awnair Corp. of Am., 3 NY2d 444, 449 [1957]; accord D’Orazio v Mainetti, 24 AD3d 915, 917 [2005]; see generally Lombard & Co., Inc. v De La Roche, 46 AD3d 393 , 393-394 [2007], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 782 [2008]; compare Sagamore Corp. v Diamond W.
discussed Cited "see" Calabrese Bakeries, Inc. v. Rockland Bakery, Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2013 · signal: see · confidence high
As such, this matter falls within the general rule that where the parties chart a “course “to conduct business through a corporation, . . . they are not at one and the same time joint venturers and stockholders, fiduciaries and nonfiduciaries, personally liable and not personally liable” (Weisman v Awnair Corp. of Am., 3 NY2d 444, 449 [1957]; accord D’Orazio v Mainetti, 24 AD3d 915, 917 [2005]; see generally Lombard & Co., Inc. v De La Roche, 46 AD3d 393 , 393-394 [2007], lv dismissed 11 NY3d 782 [2008]; compare Sagamore Corp. v Diamond W.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mainline Electric Corp., Respondent,
v.
East Quogue Union Free School District, Appellant
New York Court of Appeals.
Sep 16, 2008.
896 N.E.2d 91
Published

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.