Opinion
06-28-2016
CHIOMENTI STUDIO LEGALE, L.L.C., Plaintiff–Appellant–Respondent, v. PRODOS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, et al., Defendants–Respondents–Appellants.
Malone Law PLLC, New York (Daniel C. Malone of counsel), for appellant. Wrobel Markham Schatz Kaye & Fox LLP, New York (David C. Wrobel of counsel), for respondents.
Malone Law PLLC, New York (Daniel C. Malone of counsel), for appellant.
Wrobel Markham Schatz Kaye & Fox LLP, New York (David C. Wrobel of counsel), for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered March 9, 2015, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's veil-piercing cause of action, and denied plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment on that cause of action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion court correctly noted that “New York does not recognize a separate cause of action to pierce the corporate veil” (Fiber Consultants, Inc. v. Fiber Optek Interconnect Corp., 15 A.D.3d 528, 529, 792 N.Y.S.2d 89 [2d Dept.2005], lv. dismissed 4 N.Y.3d 882, 798 N.Y.S.2d 726, 831 N.E.2d 971 [2005] ; see also Matter of Morris v. New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin., 82 N.Y.2d 135, 141, 603 N.Y.S.2d 807, 623 N.E.2d 1157 [1993] ). Further, the motion court correctly dismissed the veil-piercing allegations, because there is insufficient evidence to justify piercing the corporate veil to hold the individual defendant liable for the corporate defendant's obligations. The evidence does not show that the individual defendant dominated or controlled the corporate defendant by undercapitalizing it, intermingling funds, disregarding the corporate form, or otherwise (Matter of Morris, 82 N.Y.2d at 141, 603 N.Y.S.2d 807, 623 N.E.2d 1157 ; Tap Holdings, LLC v. Orix Fin. Corp., 109 A.D.3d 167, 174, 970 N.Y.S.2d 178 [1st Dept.2013] ). Neither did plaintiff establish the existence of a fraud or wrong against it (id. ). The corporate defendant's alleged failure to pay legal fees owed under the parties' agreement does not constitute a fraud or wrong sufficient to pierce the corporate veil (Bonacasa Realty Co., LLC v. Salvatore, 109 A.D.3d 946, 947, 972 N.Y.S.2d 84 [2d Dept.2013] ).
FRIEDMAN, J.P., ANDRIAS, SAXE, RICHTER, KAHN, JJ., concur.