Contracts · MBE-tested
Marylea Meyersohn et al., Respondents, v. Barry Bloom, Appellant
288 A.D.2d 36733 N.Y.S.2d 335·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2001·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Marylea Meyersohn et al., Respondents, v Barry Bloom, Appellant.
[733 NYS2d 335]
[MAJORITY]
—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered December 6, 1999, which granted plaintiffs’, motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
In accordance with the leave granted on a prior appeal (259 AD2d 432), plaintiff served an amended complaint seeking to recover against defendant on the theory of promissory estoppel. Summary judgment was properly granted to plaintiff upon a showing of a clear and unambiguous promise by defendant to personally repay the amount that plaintiffs placed with defendant’s now defunct investment firm, plaintiffs’ detrimental reliance on that promise in forbearing from legal action against defendant’s firm, and financial loss (see, id.). We have considered defendant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Ellerin and Saxe, JJ.