This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

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.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.