Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
P and D met in New York City in 1968 and maintained a continuous personal and business relationship until July 1990. They spent substantial amounts of time together for purposes of business and pleasure. P alleges that throughout their twenty-two-year relationship, he assisted D in creating sculptures, photographs, drawings, paintings, print editions, and mock-ups for posters, advertisements, magazine covers, catalogs, and books. P alleges that D repeatedly promised to provide him with various examples of each of the production phases of the work created. D allegedly promised that he would (1) pay P's living expenses; (2) reimburse his business expenses; and (3) pay his income taxes. P alleged actions in contract, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, constructive trust, conversion, and replevin. D moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. D argues that dismissal is proper in that implied contracts arising out of personal relationships are not recognized in New York. D contends that the alleged express promises are not sufficiently certain or specific to be enforceable. D argues that parts of the contract claim must be dismissed as lacking in consideration or being barred by the statute of limitations and the statute of frauds.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co