From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Macklowe v. 42nd Street Development Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 23, 1990
157 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

January 23, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (William J. Davis, J.).


Plaintiff, sole general partner of a limited partnership known as Elfon Realty Co. (Elfon), brought this action against defendant 42nd Street Development Corporation, sole limited partner of Elfon, claiming that it improperly assigned its right to receive partnership distributions to defendant William J. Condren without the express consent of plaintiff, in violation of express conditions of the partnership agreement. Defendants counterclaimed for breach of fiduciary duty and for an accounting. Defendant 42nd Street then sought production of partnership records, and plaintiff moved for a protective order.

Contrary to defendants' contentions, a limited partner is entitled to an accounting only "whenever circumstances render it just and reasonable" (Partnership Law § 99 [b]). The court could thus properly find that, under the circumstances herein, the assignment was sufficient misconduct to bar defendant from viewing the documents at this stage of the litigation. Further, a party may not seek, through discovery, the ultimate relief sought on the merits of its action for an accounting (Wolther v Samuel, 110 A.D.2d 506, 507 [1st Dept 1985]).

Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Smith and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Macklowe v. 42nd Street Development Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 23, 1990
157 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Macklowe v. 42nd Street Development Corp.

Case Details

Full title:HARRY MACKLOWE, Respondent, v. 42ND STREET DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 23, 1990

Citations

157 A.D.2d 566 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
550 N.Y.S.2d 309

Citing Cases

Rothman v. RNK Capital, LLC

However, as plaintiffs assert in their second cause of action that they are entitled to review defendants'…

Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y. v. E. Coast Power & Gas, LLC

Contrary to Con Edison's contention, Supreme Court did not improperly grant the ultimate relief sought by…