Case Name: Sailsman Graphics Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, v. Verizon Yellow Pages Company et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2004-03-30
Citations: 5 A.D.3d 317
Docket Number: 
Parties: Sailsman Graphics Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Verizon Yellow Pages Company et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 317–317

Head Matter:
Sailsman Graphics Company, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Verizon Yellow Pages Company et al., Respondents.
[773 NYS2d 559]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered April 25, 2003, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
In this class action to recover overcharges, the terms of the agreements were not ambiguous. Reasonably interpreted (see Uribe v Merchants Bank of N.Y., 91 NY2d 336, 341 [1998]), those terms sustain defendants' position that the issue period of the directories could be extended for up to six months, either before or after the date of publication. Furthermore, the claim for unjust enrichment is not supportable where the contract language governs the dispute (Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v Long Is. R.R. Co., 70 NY2d 382 [1987]). Finally, there is nothing inequitable about defendants retaining advertising fees resulting from an agreement that plaintiffs had freely entered into. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Friedman and Gonzalez, JJ.