Case Name: Hearst Magazines, Respondent, v. Greenstone/Fontana Corp. et al., Defendants, and Jeanne Fontana, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-05-31
Citations: 139 A.D.3d 623
Docket Number: 
Parties: Hearst Magazines, Respondent, v Greenstone/Fontana Corp. et al., Defendants, and Jeanne Fontana, Appellant.
Judges: Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Manzanet-Daniels and Gesmer, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 139
Pages: 623–624

Head Matter:
Hearst Magazines, Respondent, v Greenstone/Fontana Corp. et al., Defendants, and Jeanne Fontana, Appellant.
[30 NYS3d 859]

Opinion:
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Saliann Scarpulla, J.), entered March 4, 2015, after a bench trial, in favor of plaintiff and against, inter alia, defendant Jeanne Fontana in the aggregate amount of $88,353.81, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
As a general matter, the unasserted claim by plaintiff magazine against its frequent advertiser would not constitute a cognizable claim for damages (see Phillips-Smith Specialty Retail Group II v Parker Chapin Flattau & Klimpl, 265 AD2d 208, 210 [1st Dept 1999], lv denied 94 NY2d 759 [2000]). Moreover, where the funds were converted by defendant advertising agency, but the ad for which it received the funds nevertheless ran, there is no claim for conversion of the funds (see generally Hillsley v State Bank of Albany, 24 AD2d 28, 30 [1st Dept 1965]).
However, where, as here, a fiduciary profits from a breach of loyalty, those profits must be paid over to the principal (see Tsutsui v Barasch, 67 AD3d 896, 898-899 [2d Dept 2009]). Accordingly, the trial court properly entered judgment in plaintiff's favor in the amount of the ill-gotten proceeds.
Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Manzanet-Daniels and Gesmer, JJ.