ORR v. YUN

2865, 603423/06.

146 A.D.3d 674 (2017)

2017 NY Slip Op 00542

46 N.Y.S.3d 49

KENNETH ORR, Respondent, v. DANIEL YUN et al., Appellants.

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

Decided January 26, 2017.


Plaintiff was not entitled to lost salary because, even if his right to employment under the subject agreement had been triggered by his proper exercise of the option, any employment thereunder would have been at will because its duration was not specified (see Sabetay v Sterling Drug, 69 N.Y.2d 329, 333 [1987]).

The claim for breach of fiduciary duty, assuming that an underlying fiduciary relationship existed, was unsupported...

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