Korff v. Corbett
Decision Date | 10 May 2005 |
Docket Number | 4799.,4799A. |
Citation | 2005 NY Slip Op 03780,794 N.Y.S.2d 374,18 A.D.3d 248 |
Parties | JOSEPH KORFF, Appellant, v. RICHARD A. CORBETT et al., Respondents. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Defendants Richard A. Corbett and the Concorde Companies (formerly known as International Plaza, a Florida partnership) acquired rights to a 35-year leasehold on approximately 135 acres of land adjacent to Tampa International Airport in Florida. In developing this property, defendants engaged plaintiff, an attorney, to provide various business, consulting and legal services. The complaint alleges that during the course of such engagement, defendants repeatedly agreed and assured plaintiff that, given his extraordinary services on their behalf, he would be paid hourly fees and additional compensation based upon the eventual result of any development, transaction or significant financing with respect to the property. In reliance upon such promises, it is alleged, plaintiff worked actively and diligently on behalf of defendants to facilitate the financing and development of the property. The complaint further alleges that during the course of his engagement plaintiff and certain of the defendants entered into a written agreement memorializing the parties' agreement with respect to defendants' payment of outstanding hourly legal fees to the law firms with which plaintiff was affiliated and, with the knowledge of those firms, additional compensation to plaintiff individually for his specified services.
The parties' undated agreement, in the form of a letter from plaintiff to defendant, provided as follows:
The document is signed by plaintiff and "Agreed to and accepted by" Richard A. Corbett "on behalf of himself and all entities in which he has an interest" and by "International Plaza a Florida General Partnership By: Richard A. Corbett."
The IAS court, in granting defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action, found that the letter contains nothing to show it was intended to provide plaintiff with additional compensation in connection with the development of the property, to which no reference is made; that the identities of the parties to the agreement are unclear; that, at least, the letter must be construed to pertain only to plaintiff, defendant Corbett and the Concorde Companies; that the start date and duration of the alleged agreement are not clearly defined and there is nothing to indicate when, if ever, the agreement was to terminate; that the essential terms of the agreement cannot be discerned from the submissions; and that the provisions for payment from "the first decent term financing source" and of a percentage of International Plaza's "gross receipts" are simply too indefinite to be enforced as an agreement between the parties. We disagree.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Ja Apparel Corp. v. Abboud
...St. Co. v. Franklin Natl Bank, 37 N.Y.2d 245, 248, 371 N.Y.S.2d 915, 918, 333 N.E.2d 184 (1975)); see also Korff v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 251, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374, 377 (1st Dep't 2005) ("[W]here words used in a written contract are susceptible of more than one interpretation, the courts will......
-
Fuller & D'Angelo, P.C. v. Cornerstone Hospitality Advisors
...behalf bound the entity to the contract, Goldston v. Bandwidth Tech. Corp., 52 A.D.3d 360, 361-62 (1st Dep't 2008); Korff v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 251 (1st Dep't 2005); Cointech, Inc. v. Masaryk Towers Corp., 7 A.D.3d 376, 381 (1st Dep't 2004); Edge Mgt. Corp. v. Crossborder Exch. Corp., ......
-
Berman v. Sugo LLC
...assert that it bestowed a benefit on the defendant and was not adequately compensated for that benefit. Korff v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 251, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374 (N.Y.App.Div. 2005). Unjust enrichment is a quasicontractually remedy that the law provides where a contractual relationship has leg......
-
American Bldg. Maintenance Co. v. Acme Property
...a benefit on the Henneseys and Clasen and that it was not adequately compensated for that benefit. See Korff v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374, 377 (App. Div. 1st Dep't 2005). Clasen and the Henneseys assert that ABM's unjust enrichment claim should be dismissed because they did n......
-
Parol evidence
...Grp., Inc., 30 N.Y.3d 288, 89 N.E.3d 490 (2017); Di Menna v. Cooper & Evans Co ., 220 N.Y. 391, 115 N.E. 993 (1917); Korf v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374 (1st Dept. 2005); Belknap v. Dean Witter & Co., 92 A.D.2d 515, 460 N.Y.S.2d 1005 (1983), af ’d, 61 N.Y.2d 802, 462 N.E.2d 125......
-
Table of cases
...A.D.2d 944, 637 N.Y.S.2d 899 (4th Dept. 1996), § 2:220 Kopetic v. Bierman, 207 N.Y.S.2d 540 (2d Dept. 1960), § 2:250 Korff v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374 (1st Dept. 2005), § 12:10 Kosturek v. Kosturek, 107 A.D.3d 762, 968 N.Y.S.2d 97 (2d Dept. 2013), §5:150 Koump v. Smith, 25 N......
-
Parol evidence
...may be introduced to establish the unwritten terms. Di Menna v. Cooper & Evans Co ., 220 N.Y. 391, 115 N.E. 993 (1917); Korff v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374 (1st Dept. 2005); Smith v. Slocum, 71 A.D.2d 1058, 420 N.Y.S.2d 814 (4th Dept. 1979); Tobin v. Union News Co ., 18 A.D.2d......
-
Parol evidence
...Grp., Inc., 30 N.Y.3d 288, 89 N.E.3d 490 (2017); Di Menna v. Cooper & Evans Co ., 220 N.Y. 391, 115 N.E. 993 (1917); Korf v. Corbett, 18 A.D.3d 248, 794 N.Y.S.2d 374 (1st Dept. 2005); Belknap v. Dean Witter & Co., 92 A.D.2d 515, 460 N.Y.S.2d 1005 (1983), af ’d, 61 N.Y.2d 802, 462 N.E.2d 125......