Epstein Secrets

pt the relevant rule of New York landlord-tenant law for purposes of deciding the remaining issue in this dis- pute, and hold that, consistent with New York law, OFM was entitled to arbitrarily withhold its consent to Epstein's request to sublet the Premises to Fisher. Even assum- ing OFM had a hidden a

d in part and denied in part. I. Federal Courts .3=409 In diversity action, federal court sitting in New York must apply New York law, including New York's choice-of-law rules. 2. Contracts e=s144 Under New York's choice-of-law rules, when court is construing meaning of con- tract, court should apply

t may not be introduced to create ambiguity. Arthur M. Handler, Whitman & Ransom, New York City, for plaintiff. Elliot Silverman, Cold & Wachtel, New York City, for defendant. ORDER CONBOY, District Judge: We have before us an action for breach of contract. Plaintiff Michael R. Stroll ("Stroll") see

he person to whom it was made; (4) the intention that it should be acted upon; and (5) that the plaintiff acted upon it to his damage." Shapiro I UJB Fin. Corp., 964 F.2d 272, 284 (3d Cir.1992). Although the rule does not require a recitation of "every material detail" of the alleged fraud, it does require

parties' written and oral arguments, I will deny the defendants' motions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and to transfer this case to New York. Further, I find that the amended complaint adequately states claims of breach of fiduciary duty and negligent misrepresentation. Finally, I will g

claims, and instead shall look to Virgin Islands law to determine whether the plaintiffs have stated claims cognizable in this jurisdiction. 2. New York's 'Martin Act Does Not Apply to this Lawsuit The defendants aver that the Martin Act, New York General Business section 352 et seq., bars the plainti

the person to whom it was made; (4) the intention that it should be acted upon; and (5) that the plaintiff acted upon it to his damage." Shapiro v. UJB Fin. Corp., 964 F.2d 272, 284 (3d Cir. 1992). Although the rule does not require a recitation of EFTA01726537 Financial Trust Co., Inc. v. Citibank, N.A. C

zedr and existing under the laws of the State of New York, withrits principal place of business at The Villard House, 45744adison Avenue, New York, New York 10022. 5. Defendant, Ohislaine Maxwell ("Maxwell"), is, upon information and belief, a resident.snd citizen of the State of New York, and at all

it should be acted upon; and (5) that the plaintiff acted upon it to his damage.'" Financial Trust Co., 268 F. Supp.2d at 575 (quoting Shapirio v. UJB Fin. Corp., 964 F.2d 272, 284 (3d Cir. 1992)). The defendants base their argument that plaintiffs have failed to state a claim upon which relief can be grant