Raimondi v. Fedeli

• Decision Date: 16 July 1968
• Citation: Raimondi v. Fedeli, 291 N.Y.S.2d 900, 30 A.D.2d 802 (N.Y. App. Div. 1968)
• Parties: Giovanni RAIMONDI d/b/a Maglieficio Legnanese, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Gaetano FEDELL, Defendant, and Joseph Parisi and Parisi Creations, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Page 900

291 N.Y.S.2d 900

30 A.D.2d 802

Giovanni RAIMONDI d/b/a Maglieficio Legnanese, Plaintiff-Respondent, v.Gaetano FEDELL, Defendant, and Joseph Parisi and Parisi Creations, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

July 16, 1968.

G. J. Tucker, New York City, for plaintiff-respondent.

M. Berman, New York City, for defendants-appellants.

Before STEUER, J.P., and CAPOZZOLI, McGIVERN, RABIN and McNALLY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Order, entered April 8, 1968, denying motion to defendants-appellants to dismiss the complaint and vacate the attachment, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of dismissing the complaint with leave to plaintiff to apply to Special Term for leave to serve an amended complaint (Cushman & Wakefield v. John David, Inc., 23 A.D.2d 827, 259 N.Y.S.2d 158;Cyg-Knit Mills v. Denton Sleeping Garment Mills, 26 A.D.2d 800, 273 N.Y.S.2d 831;Andlou Properties v. Grayck, 24 A.D.2d 716, 263 N.Y.S.2d 290), and, as so modified, affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements to appellants.

The complaint fails to factually allege that the fraudulent conduct of defendants-appellants induced the sale of plaintiff's merchandise to defendant Fedeli.The fact that the complaint is demurrable does not require the vacatur of the attachment when the affidavits establish that plaintiff may have a cause of action which will support the attachment.(Atlantic Raw Materials, Inc....