EPSTEIN ENGINEERING P.C., Respondent, v THOMAS CATALDO et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York
2012
[955 NYS2d 508]
It is entirely possible, given the breadth and duration of the alleged deception, that defendants diverted corporate opportunities belonging to plaintiff principal, and that any lost profits ascribable thereto accrued after the date of Cataldo‘s resignation. Thus, it would be inappropriate to use the date of Cataldo‘s resignation as a cut-off date.
We have considered and rejected the parties’ remaining contentions. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
The decision and order of this Court entered herein on May 22, 2012 (95 AD3d 679 [2012]) is hereby recalled and vacated (see 2012 NY Slip Op 94218[U] [2012] [decided simultaneously herewith]).
