Since defendant did not convey his shares as part of a larger conveyance of Good Energy as a going concern, but, rather, sold his shares back to the majority shareholder, no issue of "continuity of place" or "continuity of name" is involved, and the "sale of business" rationale is not applicable (see Purchasing Assoc. v Weitz,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
GOOD ENERGY, L.P. v. KOSACHUK
49 A.D.3d 331 (2008)
853 N.Y.S.2d 75
GOOD ENERGY, L.P., et al., Respondents, v. CHRIS KOSACHUK, Appellant.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Decided March 11, 2008.
Decided March 11, 2008.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
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.
