“Under federal and New York law, an account stated ‘refers to a promise by a debtor to pay a stated sum of money which the parties had agreed upon as the amount due.’ ”  National Econ. Research Assocs., Inc. v. Purolite “C” Corp., No. 08 Civ. 7600, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24458, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2011) (citations omitted); accord Lankler Siffert & Wohl, LLP v. Rossi, 287 F. Supp. 2d 398, 407 (S.D.N.Y. 2003); Ally & Gargano, Inc. v. Comprehensive Accounting Corp., 615 F. Supp. 426, 429 (S.D.N.Y. 1985).

In New York, “[t]o state a claim for an account stated, the plaintiff must plead that: ‘(1) an account was presented; (2) it was accepted as correct; and (3) debtor promised to pay the amount stated.’ ”  National Econ. Research Assocs., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24458, at *6 (citations omitted); accord IMG Fragrance Brands, LLC v. Houbigant, Inc., 679 F. Supp. 2d 395, 411 (S.D.N.Y. 2009).

“The second and third elements ‘may be implied if ‘a party receiving a statement of account keeps it without objecting to it within a reasonable time or if the debtor makes partial payment.’ ‘ ”  National Econ. Research Assocs., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24458, at *6 (citations omitted); accord IMG Fragrance Brands, LLC, 679 F. Supp. 2d at 411.

New York’s Appellate Division, Second Department has held that, for purposes of a cause of action for an account stated, a debtor’s failure to object to invoices for a period of five months is unreasonable.  R.A. Associates v. Lerner, 245 A.D.2d 437, 666 N.Y.S.2d 665, 666 (2d Dep’t 1997); see also Shea & Gould v. Burr, 194 A.D.2d 369, 371, 598 N.Y.S.2d 261 (1st Dep’t 1993) (“The failure to object to the unitemized bill for a period of five months suffices to give rise to an account stated, especially in view of the partial payment made.”); Sieratzki v. Sei Global, Inc., No. 600183/09, 2009 WL 4009128 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. N.Y. County Nov. 10, 2009) (granting summary judgment for the plaintiff, a lawyer, in action for an account stated; holding that the defendant client’s delay of five months in objecting to plaintiff’s invoices was unreasonable).

“As to timing, ‘[a]n objection made for the first time upon commencement of proceedings will not suffice.’ ”  National Econ. Research Assocs., Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24458, at *6 (citation omitted); see also O’Connell & Aronowitz v. Gullo, 229 A.D.2d 637, 644 N.Y.S.2d 870, 871-872 (3d Dep’t 1996) (affirming Supreme Court’s judgment, issued after a non-jury trial, in favor of the plaintiff, an attorney, for an account stated; holding that, because the defendant client did not object to the plaintiff’s statement of account until the plaintiff sued to recover legal fees, the client’s objection was insufficient).

If your company wants to bring, or needs a lawyer to defend it in, business litigation and you are located in the New York City area, call Attorney David S. Rich at (212) 209-3972.

On June 29, 2015, New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio signed, into law, the New York City Fair Chance Act, Local 63 of 2015 (the "Fair Chance Act," the "NYCFCA," "Local Law 63" or the "new Law"), which takes effect on October 27, 2015.  The Fair Chance Act prohibits most employers in New York City, [...]

In New Jersey, the elements of trade libel, also known as product disparagement, are "1) publication; 2) with malice; 3) of false allegations concerning [the plaintiff's] property, product or business, and 4) special damages, i.e. pecuniary harm."  Mayflower Transit, LLC v. Prince, 314 F. Supp. 2d 362, 377 (D.N.J. 2004). "A product disparagement plaintiff [in [...]

Effective September 3, 2015, a new statute prohibits most employers in New York City, other than employers in the securities industry, from requesting or using an employee's or a job applicant's consumer credit history in making employment decisions. Specifically, on May 6, 2015, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio signed, into law, Local Law [...]

To prove a cause of action under section 2C:41-2(c) of the New Jersey Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“New Jersey RICO”), N.J.S.A. § 2C:41-2(c), the plaintiff must demonstrate (1) the existence of an enterprise, (2) that the enterprise engaged in or its activities affected trade or commerce, (3) that defendant was employed by, or [...]

On December 29, 2014, New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law Assembly Bill 8106-C / Senate Bill 5885-B (the "Act"). Among other changes to current law, the Act renders the ten members with the largest percentage ownership interest of each limited liability company ("LLC") in New York State personally liable, jointly and severally, [...]

What Are The Elements Of Fraud In New Jersey?

In New Jersey, the elements of common-law fraud are: "(1) a material misrepresentation of a presently existing or past fact; (2) knowledge or belief by the defendant of its falsity; (3) an intention that the other person rely on it; (4) reasonable reliance thereon by the other person; and (5) resulting damages." Gennari v. Weichert [...]

In September 2014, the respective Mayors of four municipalities in New Jersey -- the Cities of East Orange, Passaic, and Paterson and the Township of Irvington -- signed into law paid sick leave ordinances for private employees (collectively, the "Sick Leave Ordinances" or the "Ordinances"). Effective January 2015, the East Orange, Irvington, Passaic, and Paterson [...]

In New York, "In order to establish a breach of fiduciary duty, a plaintiff must prove the existence of a fiduciary relationship, misconduct by the defendant, and damages that were directly caused by the defendant's misconduct." Kurtzman v. Bergstol, 40 A.D.3d 588, 590, 835 N.Y.S.2d 644 (2nd Dep't 2007); see also Pokoik v. Pokoik, 982 [...]

On September 30, 2014, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio signed an executive order,Executive Order No. 7 (the “Executive Order”), requiring companies or individuals who receive, from the City of New York or from a City economic development entity, financial assistance of one million dollars or more and which have annual gross revenues of [...]

In New Jersey, common law conversion is defined as ” ‘the exercise of any act of dominion in denial of another’s title to . . . chattels, or inconsistent with such title. ‘ ”  Marsellis-Warner Corp. v. Rabens, 51 F. Supp. 2d 508, 525 (D.N.J. 1999) (quoting Mueller v. Technical Devices Corp., 8 N.J. 201, [...]