STEPHEN KATZ APPELLANTS-res, v. BARRY J. BEIL res, FINKLE ROSS & ROST, LLP, ET AL., RESPONDENTSap

STEPHEN KATZ APPELLANTS-res, v. BARRY J. BEIL res, FINKLE ROSS & ROST, LLP, ET AL., RESPONDENTSap — (INDEX NO. 600510/11)In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty, (1) the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Driscoll, J.), entered January 11, 2013, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Finkle Ross & Rost, LLP, and Finkle & Ross, LLP, which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the cause of action alleging accounting malpractice, and the defendants Finkle Ross & Rost, LLP, and Finkle & Ross, LLP, cross-appeal from so much of the same order as denied that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the cause of action alleging aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and (2) the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the same court entered February 28, 2013, as denied that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the counterclaim of the defendants Barry J. Beil and Stanley Pine alleging defamation.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

STEPHEN KATZ APPELLANTS-res, v. BARRY J. BEIL res, FINKLE ROSS & ROST, LLP, ET AL., RESPONDENTSap — (INDEX NO. 600510/11)In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty, (1) the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Driscoll, J.), entered January 11, 2013, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Finkle Ross & Rost, LLP, and Finkle & Ross, LLP, which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the cause of action alleging accounting malpractice, and the defendants Finkle Ross & Rost, LLP, and Finkle & Ross, LLP, cross-appeal from so much of the same order as denied that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the cause of action alleging aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, and (2) the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the same court entered February 28, 2013, as denied that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the counterclaim of the defendants Barry J. Beil and Stanley Pine alleging defamation.

ORDERED that the appeal and cross appeal from the order entered January 11, 2013, and the appeal from the order entered February 28, 2013, are dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

STEPHEN KATZ APPELLANTS-res, v. BARRY J. BEIL res, FINKLE ROSS & ROST, LLP, ET AL., RESPONDENTSap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal