Following a jury verdict and pursuant to CPLR §§4404, 4405 and 5001, the defendants (“A” and “B”) moved for an order, inter alia, denying plaintiff prejudgment interest on his claim for unjust enrichment, setting aside the verdict to the extent that it “awarded damages that accrued outside the limitations period, … and/or setting aside the jury verdict to the extent that it is inconsistent with the charge given on the cause of action for unjust enrichment.”

The court found that there was “no basis upon which to set aside the jury’s verdict.”

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]