Fisher v Zaks

Fisher v Zaks 2008 NY Slip Op 01075 [48 AD3d 251] February 7, 2008 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, April 16, 2008

Mark B. Fisher, Appellant,
v
Sam Zaks et al., Respondents.

—[*1] Steven R. Goldberg, New York City, for appellant.

Bryan Cave LLP, New York City (Daniel P. Waxman of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen E. Freedman, J.), entered September 18, 2006, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In seeking to pierce the corporate veil, plaintiff failed to offer evidence that defendant owners exercised complete domination of the corporation with respect to the transaction under attack, and that such domination was used to commit a fraud or wrong against plaintiff, resulting in injury (Matter of Morris v New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin., 82 NY2d 135, 141 [1993]). Defendants successfully refuted the claim that they transferred assets to themselves or family members or to a new corporation to plaintiff's detriment. There was no proof of insolvency or any improper conveyances (see Debtor and Creditor Law §§ 271-276). As to the 2001 corporate tax return, the record indicates the corporation was viable at that time, and current in its obligation to pay interest on the debt in 2001 and 2002. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Catterson and Acosta, JJ.