Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Paul J. Cowley & Associates, Inc. v. Comtax, Inc.
Citations: 100 A.D.2d 744; 473 N.Y.S.2d 625; 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17752
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; March 5, 1984; New York; State Appellate Court
The order has been unanimously affirmed with no costs awarded. The complaint asserts that defendant Barbetta made a promise to be personally liable for the corporation's debts. If this promise is proven to be false when made, it could justify piercing the corporate veil, as established in Lowendahl v. Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. Additionally, such conduct may support a deceit claim based on precedents like Channel Master Corp. v. Aluminium Ltd. Sales and Ochs v. Woods. Although Barbetta's lack of a written promise to assume liability for another's debts prevents a contract claim under General Obligations Law § 5-701(a)(2), it does not preclude a tort action, as reaffirmed in Channel Master Corp. The appeal originates from a summary judgment order issued by Justice Stone in the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, with Justices Doerr, Boomer, Green, O'Donnell, and Schnepp present.