Legal Decisions
The following are some of the important favorable legal decisions which Klapper & Fass has obtained on behalf of its clients:
1.
Advanceme, Inc. v. Avitto II, Inc. et al. - Our client, a purchaser of future credit card receivables, won summary judgment and defeated a usury defense. The court held that the purchases made by our client were not loans because, among other things, plaintiff bore the risk of not being repaid from future credit card advances. Read the entire decision:
Advanceme, Inc. v. Avitto II, Inc. et al. - Our client, a purchaser of future credit card receivables, won summary judgment and defeated a usury defense. The court held that the purchases made by our client were not loans because, among other things, plaintiff bore the risk of not being repaid from future credit card advances. Read the entire decision:2.Silhouette, LLC v. Piruz Enterprises, Inc. - In this case our client is a textile company located outside of New York who was owed monies for goods sold and delivered to defendant, a New York based company. The only defense offered by defendant was that plaintiff as a foreign corporation was not authorized to do business in New York, The court dismissed that defense, holding that a foreign company who does nothing more than mere solicitation of customers is not "doing business" in New York, sufficient to warrant filing a certificate of authority with the Secretary of State. Read the entire decision:
Silhouette, LLC v. Piruz Enterprises, Inc. - In this case our client is a textile company located outside of New York who was owed monies for goods sold and delivered to defendant, a New York based company. The only defense offered by defendant was that plaintiff as a foreign corporation was not authorized to do business in New York, The court dismissed that defense, holding that a foreign company who does nothing more than mere solicitation of customers is not "doing business" in New York, sufficient to warrant filing a certificate of authority with the Secretary of State. Read the entire decision:3.Parkway Group v. Modell's Sporting Goods - Here's one where we were on the other side of a collection. In this case, the plaintiff thought it was entitled to a real estate brokerage commission because of a letter agreement which never really spelled out an exclusive arrangement. In affirming the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's case, the Appellate Court held that plaintiff was not the procuring cause of the subject transaction; the letter agreement failed to include an essential term relating to the commission to be earned and that in any event, the plaintiff-broker had clearly abandoned the deal. Read the entire decision:
Parkway Group v. Modell's Sporting Goods - Here's one where we were on the other side of a collection. In this case, the plaintiff thought it was entitled to a real estate brokerage commission because of a letter agreement which never really spelled out an exclusive arrangement. In affirming the trial court's dismissal of the plaintiff's case, the Appellate Court held that plaintiff was not the procuring cause of the subject transaction; the letter agreement failed to include an essential term relating to the commission to be earned and that in any event, the plaintiff-broker had clearly abandoned the deal. Read the entire decision:4.Victoria Graphics v. Priorities Publications - When decided this was a case of first impression in New York on the issue of whether a debtor's tradename could be the subject of a forced sale under New York's post-judgment levy statutes. In finding for our client, the creditor, the court found that a trademark, even without associated good-will, could be the subject of an execution sale if the purchaser was in the same or similar business as the debtor. Read the entire decision:
Victoria Graphics v. Priorities Publications - When decided this was a case of first impression in New York on the issue of whether a debtor's tradename could be the subject of a forced sale under New York's post-judgment levy statutes. In finding for our client, the creditor, the court found that a trademark, even without associated good-will, could be the subject of an execution sale if the purchaser was in the same or similar business as the debtor. Read the entire decision:5.David Greenberg Textiles, Inc. v. New York Community Bancorp., Inc. - This is a case involving restrictive indorsements. Our client, the plaintiff in this matter, paid for goods that were never delivered by the seller. Instead, the seller, who it turns out was really a defunct corporation, indorses plaintiff's check with the name of the defunct corporation and deposits the check into a different account at defendant's branch. The court held that the burden was on defendant to establish that it acted in a commercially reasonable manner. The facts showed that the seller's indorsement was restrictive and its attempt to deposit plaintiff's check in another account should have put the defendant bank on notice. The bank is held liable and our client gets all of its money back plus interest. Read the entire decision:
David Greenberg Textiles, Inc. v. New York Community Bancorp., Inc. - This is a case involving restrictive indorsements. Our client, the plaintiff in this matter, paid for goods that were never delivered by the seller. Instead, the seller, who it turns out was really a defunct corporation, indorses plaintiff's check with the name of the defunct corporation and deposits the check into a different account at defendant's branch. The court held that the burden was on defendant to establish that it acted in a commercially reasonable manner. The facts showed that the seller's indorsement was restrictive and its attempt to deposit plaintiff's check in another account should have put the defendant bank on notice. The bank is held liable and our client gets all of its money back plus interest. Read the entire decision:Copyright 2011 Klapper & Fass: New York Debt Collection. All Rights Reserved.
170 Hamilton Avenue, White Plains, NY 10601
(914) 287-6466 | dfass@klapperfass.co
