1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.2d
  4. 248 A.D.2d
  5. 248 A.D.2d 247 (1998)
 

VIDAL, REYNARDS & MOYA, INC. v. MOUNTAIN SPRINGS CO.

248 A.D.2d 247 (1998)

671 N.Y.S.2d 219

Vidal, Reynards & Moya, Inc., Appellant, v. Mountain Springs Co., L.L.C., Defendant, and Mercuriana, Inc., Respondent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

March 17, 1998

The cause of action against defendant-respondent for unjust enrichment was properly dismissed on the ground that the advertising services from which it allegedly benefited were provided by plaintiff pursuant to the latter's contract with the codefendant to which respondent was not a party (see, Kagan v K-Tel Entertainment, 172 A.D.2d 375). Indeed, as the IAS Court noted, respondent sold its inventory of the product plaintiff...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases