1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 178 A.D.3d
  5. 178 A.D.3d 429 (2019)
 

PRITSKER v. OPPENHEIMER ACQUISITION CORP.

10455. 155269/17.

178 A.D.3d 429 (2019)

115 N.Y.S.3d 234

2019 NY Slip Op 08621

Robert Pritsker, Appellant, v. Oppenheimer Acquisition Corp. et al., Respondents.

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

Decided December 3, 2019.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Robert Pritsker, appellant pro se.

Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt, LLP, New York ( Richard Trotter of counsel), for respondents.

Concur—Friedman, J.P., Oing, Singh, Moulton, JJ.

This is, essentially, an action for conversion. Plaintiff's fraud allegations do not constitute independent claims for fraud and constructive fraud; rather, they form the building blocks for his argument that equitable estoppel should toll the statute of limitations for conversion (see Simcuski v Saeli, 44 N.Y.2d 442, 448 [1978]).

The complaint fails to state a cause of action for conversion.

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