SUSTAINABLE PTE LTD. Plaintiffs-res-ap, v. PEAK VENTURE PARTNERS LLC def, NADER TAVAKOLI Defendants-Appellants-res

4094. SUSTAINABLE PTE LTD. Plaintiffs-res-ap, v. PEAK VENTURE PARTNERS LLC def, NADER TAVAKOLI Defendants-Appellants-res — Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York (Emilie B. Cooper of counsel), for appellants-res — Sher Tremonte LLP, New York (Erica A. Wolff of counsel), for respondents-ap — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered on or about December 11, 2015, which to the extent appealed and cross-appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied dismissal of the claim for tortious interference with contractual relations as asserted against defendants Nader Tavakoli and Vladislav Doronin, granted dismissal of the claim for tortious interference with prospective contractual relations, and granted dismissal of the part of plaintiffs' unjust enrichment claim that is based on certain fees and expenses set forth in a SURF Agreement, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim, and otherwise affirmed, with costs against defendants-appellants.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

4094. SUSTAINABLE PTE LTD. Plaintiffs-res-ap, v. PEAK VENTURE PARTNERS LLC def, NADER TAVAKOLI Defendants-Appellants-res — Kasowitz Benson Torres LLP, New York (Emilie B. Cooper of counsel), for appellants-res — Sher Tremonte LLP, New York (Erica A. Wolff of counsel), for respondents-ap — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Anil C. Singh, J.), entered on or about December 11, 2015, which to the extent appealed and cross-appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied dismissal of the claim for tortious interference with contractual relations as asserted against defendants Nader Tavakoli and Vladislav Doronin, granted dismissal of the claim for tortious interference with prospective contractual relations, and granted dismissal of the part of plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim that is based on certain fees and expenses set forth in a SURF Agreement, unanimously modified, on the law, to deny dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim, and otherwise affirmed, with costs against defendants-appellants.

Plaintiffs have stated a claim for tortious interference with contractual relations against Doronin and Tavakoli by alleging the existence of the SURF Agreement between them and defendants Omar Amanat and Peak Venture Partners LLC; Doronin’s and Tavakoli’s knowledge of the SURF Agreement; that Doronin and Tavakolo, through a series complex business machinations, intentionally procured Amanat and Peak’s breach of the SURF Agreement by depriving them of the ability to perform under the agreement; actual breach of the SURF Agreement; and plaintiffs’ damages (Lama Holding Co. v. Smith Barney, 88 NY2d 413, 424 [1996]). Plaintiffs have further alleged that the breach of contract would not have occurred but for the activities of Doronin and Tavakoli (Cantor Fitzgerald Assoc. v. Tradition N. Am., 299 AD2d 204 [1st Dept 2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 508 [2003]).

SUSTAINABLE PTE LTD. Plaintiffs-res-ap, v. PEAK VENTURE PARTNERS LLC def, NADER TAVAKOLI Defendants-Appellants-res

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal