The Law Lion Logo - AI-powered legal writing assistantThe Law Lion
Home
Features
Pricing
Services
AboutBlogCasesContactEarn with us
Login
Ask Law Lion AI
  1. Home
  2. >Cases
  3. >Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency

0 citations·Filed April 11, 2006

Table of Contents

  • Summary of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Key Issues of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Key Facts of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Decision of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • In an action, inter alia, to impose a constructive trust on certain real prop...

Table of Contents

  • Summary of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Key Issues of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Key Facts of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Decision of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency
  • Opinions
  • Opinions
  • In an action, inter alia, to impose a constructive trust on certain real prop...

Summary of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency

The defendants, Glen Cove Community Development Agency and Glen Cove Industrial Development Agency, appealed an order denying their motion to dismiss the fifth cause of action for imposing a constructive trust. The court reversed the order, granting the motion to dismiss, as the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a legally cognizable transfer in reliance on a promise or unjust enrichment by the defendants.

Key Issues of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency

  • Imposition of a constructive trust
  • Dismissal of the fifth cause of action

Key Facts of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency

  • Plaintiffs failed to show a legally cognizable transfer in reliance on a promise
  • Plaintiffs failed to show unjust enrichment by the defendants

Decision of the case Doxey v. Glen Cove Community Development Agency

The order entered February 3, 2005, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, and that branch of the appellants’ motion which was to dismiss the fifth cause of action is granted.

Opinions

In an action, inter alia, to impose a constructive trust on certain real property, the defendants Glen Cove Community Development Agency and Glen Cove Industrial Development Agency appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Warshawsky, J.), entered February 3, 2005, as denied that branch of their motion which was to dismiss the fifth cause of action pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7), and the plaintiffs cross-appeal from the same order. Ordered that the cross appeal is dismissed as abandoned (see 22 NYCRR 670.8 [e]); and it is further, Ordered that the order entered February 3, 2005, is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, and that branch of the appellants’ motion which was to dismiss the fifth cause of action is granted. To state a cause of action for the imposition of a constructive trust, the plaintiffs must plead and prove four essential elements: (1) a confidential or fiduciary relationship, (2) a promise, (3) a transfer in reliance thereon, and (4) unjust enrichment (see Sharp v Kosmalski, 40 NY2d 119 [1976]; Gaentner v Benkovich, 18 AD3d 424, 426-427 [2005]; Satler v Merlis, 252 AD2d 551 [1998]). Accepting the plaintiffs’ factual allegations as true and according them the benefit of every favorable inference (see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 87-88 [1994]), the plaintiffs failed to show a “legally cognizable transfer in reliance” on any promise by the Glen Cove Community Development Agency or the Glen Cove Industrial Development Agency (hereinafter the Glen Cove defendants) or unjust enrichment by the Glen Cove defendants (Gaentner v Benkovich, supra at 427; Sailer v Merlis, supra).

Accordingly, the fifth cause of action to impose a constructive trust should have been dismissed. Schmidt, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Mastro, JJ., concur.

The Law Lion logoThe Law Lion.

The Law Lion is the only platform combining AI legal writing grounded in real case law with an expert human writing service — serving attorneys, paralegals, and everyday people nationwide.

[email protected]
Mon–Fri 9am–6pm EST · Rush available
Serving Clients Nationwide

AI Tool

  • → AI Legal Writing Tool
  • → AI Document Drafting
  • → Motion Drafting
  • → Contract Drafting
  • → Legal Research
  • → Case Law Search
  • → Citation Generator
  • → Document Review
  • → Contract Review
  • → For Lawyers

Writing Service

  • → Eviction Defense
  • → Court Documents
  • → Custody & Family
  • → Divorce Documents
  • → Debt & Collections
  • → All Writing Services

Top Guides

  • → Eviction Response Guide
  • → Best AI Legal Tools 2026
  • → Debt Validation Letter Guide

Company

  • → About The Law Lion
  • → Client Results
  • → Transparent Pricing
  • → Legal Guides & Blog
  • → Contact & Free Consult
  • → Affiliate Program

Top Services

  • → Eviction Notice Response
  • → Debt Validation Letter
  • → Court Summons Response
© 2026 The Law Lion LLC · AI Legal Writing & Expert Document Service
Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceSitemap