From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Telecommunications Technology Corp. v. Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 21, 1997
235 A.D.2d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

January 21, 1997.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered April 24, 1996, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss plaintiffs cause of action for breach of contract, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Williams, JJ.


Accepting plaintiffs allegations as true, the IAS Court correctly held that the subject writing, under which defendants promised to give plaintiff, a computer consulting service, "exclusive notification on all [of their] consulting requirements" and "to maintain" plaintiffs "presence" with defendants "by guaranteeing that no less than 50% of all consultants at [defendants] will be [plaintiffs] consultants", is not so vague as to be unenforceable. The parties' course of dealing and other commercial or trade usage may provide a method for calculating the missing price term ( Cobble Hill Nursing Home v Henry Warren Corp., 74 NY2d 475, 483, cert denied 498 US 816), and the law may imply a reasonable time for performance depending on the facts and circumstances of the particular case ( Savasta v 470 Newport Assocs., 82 NY2d 763). Defendants' argument that the agreement was terminable at will is without merit since plaintiff was not their employee ( see, Rule v Brine, Inc., 85 F3d 1002, 1013), and their argument that the agreement is void under the Statute of Frauds is improperly raised for the first time on appeal.


Summaries of

Telecommunications Technology Corp. v. Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 21, 1997
235 A.D.2d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Telecommunications Technology Corp. v. Bank

Case Details

Full title:TELECOMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION, Respondent, v. DEUTSCHE BANK…

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

Date published: Jan 21, 1997

Citations

235 A.D.2d 288 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
652 N.Y.S.2d 291

Citing Cases

Okoli v. Maduegbuna

Plaintiff attorney alleges that he assisted defendants in a contingency fee case for which they paid him 20%…

Lazard Freres v. Protective Life Ins. Co.

In light of all of these possibilities, and of the fact that Lazard failed to raise this issue until oral…