SSM Consulting LLC v CTI Teksource LLC
2013 NY Slip Op 08118 [112 AD3d 437]
December 5, 2013
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, January 29, 2014


SSM Consulting LLC, Appellant,
v
CTI Teksource LLC, et al., Respondents. CTI Teksource LLC et al., Respondents, v CTI Teksource I, Inc., Also Known as CTI Teksource, Inc., et al., Appellants.

—[*1] Cardillo & Corbett, New York (Tulio R. Prieto of counsel), for appellants.

Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP, New York (Anthony Galano, III of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J.), entered June 1, 2012, to the extent that it denied the motion for summary judgment of defendants CTI Teksource I, Inc., Steven Tucker and SSM Consulting, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court properly found the exception to the non-compete clauses ambiguous (see Greenfield v Philles Records, 98 NY2d 562, 569-570 [2002]). Given the ambiguity, there are issues of fact as to the specific conduct defendant Tucker was prohibited from engaging in and whether his conduct was impermissibly competitive or de minimis. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Renwick, Feinman and Clark, JJ.