Helmsley v. Cohen
| Decision Date | 03 February 1977 |
| Citation | 391 N.Y.S.2d 522,56 A.D.2d 519 |
| Parties | Harry B. HELMSLEY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Seymour COHEN et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
A. M. Dattoma, Great Neck, for plaintiff-respondent.
M. R. Levine, New York City, for defendants-appellants.
Before STEVENS, P.J., and KUPFERMAN, MARKEWICH and YESAWICH, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Order entered July 7, 1976 in the Supreme Court, New York County and the judgment entered thereon July 22, 1976 unanimously modified on the law to deny so much of plaintiff's motion as sought to strike the second affirmative defense of 129 Front Company, a New York partnership; to grant the cross-motion to strike the complaint as to the individual defendants; and, to sever such cause with leave to plaintiff to replead if so advised. As so modified, the order and judgment appealed from are otherwise affirmed, without costs and without disbursements for the reasons, where applicable, stated by Riccobono, J. at Special Term.
The affirmative defense is raised that the lease herein was assigned to and assumed by the partnership and therefore no individual, but only partnership liability, if any, would attach. The record supports this contention. The lease between plaintiff and Walston & Co., Inc. was assigned to 129 Front Company, the partnership, with the written consent of plaintiff, and it was the partnership, acting by its general partner, which agreed to assume the obligations of the lease. While under certain circumstances partners may be jointly and severally liable for debts chargeable to the partnership (Partnership Law, §§ 24--26), generally their individual assets are chargeable for partnership debts only after the partnership is adjudicated bankrupt, or, under the equitable doctrine of 'marshalling assets', when the joint or partnership property is insufficient to pay partnership debts and there appears to be no effective remedy without resort to individual property. (See Wisnouse v. Telsey, D.C., 367 F.Supp. 855; Matter of Peck, 206 N.Y. 55, 99 N.E. 258; Meech v. Allen, 17 N.Y. 300; Stern v. Low, 27 A.D.2d 756, 277 N.Y.S.2d 756). Therefore, absent an allegation that the partnership is insolvent or otherwise unable to pay its obligations, no action lies against the partners individually (Friedman v. Gettner, 6 A.D.2d 647, 180 N.Y.S.2d 446, affd. 7 N.Y.2d 764, 194 N.Y.S.2d 35, 163 N.E. 141) and the motion to strike the complaint as to the individual d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. Latham Sparrowbush Associates
...in contract that give rise to only joint liability on individual partners. Meyer, 552 N.Y.S.2d at 616; Helmsley v. Cohen, 56 A.D.2d 519, 391 N.Y.S.2d 522, 523 (1st Dep't 1977); Ryan v. Brohpy, 755 F.Supp. 595, 598 (S.D.N.Y.1991). It is clear under New York law that in order to state a claim......
-
Cunard Line Ltd. v. Abney
...Pine Plains Lumber Corp. v. Messina (3rd Dep't 1981) 78 A.D.2d 271, 435 N.Y.S.2d 381, 384. See also Helmsley v. Cohen (1st Dep't 1977) 56 A.D.2d 519, 391 N.Y.S.2d 522, 523. No such allegation was made in this case, and it clearly seems unwarranted. Indeed, the plaintiff specifically observe......
-
National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. Robert Christopher Associates
...partnership, defendant Robert Christopher Associates, is liable. Their contention is based on this Court's ruling in Helmsley v. Cohen (56 A.D.2d 519, 391 N.Y.S.2d 522), which requires application of the equitable doctrine of marshaling assets where the assets of an individual partner are t......
-
U.S. v. 175 Inwood Associates Llp.
...[limited liability] partnership debts, creditors may look to the general partners to satisfy the debts."); Helmsley v. Cohen, 56 A.D.2d 519, 391 N.Y.S.2d 522, 523 (1st Dep't 1977) ("individual assets are chargeable for [limited liability] partnership debts only after partnership is adjudica......