top of page
All Posts
Misrepresentations Concerning Intent Not to Perform Are Not The Same As Misrepresentations Concerning The Ability to Perform For Duplication Purposes
“A cause of action for fraud does not arise when the only fraud charged relates to a breach of contract.” Krantz v. Chateau Stores of Can. Ltd. , 256 A.D.2d 186, 187 (1st Dept. 1998) (citations omitted). “To plead a viable cause of action for fraud arising out of a contractual relationship, the plaintiff must allege a breach of duty which is collateral or extraneous to the contract between the parties.” Id. (citations and quotation marks omitted). One way to satisfy this re
admin
Dec 2, 20204 min read
New York Court Appeals Holds Liquidated Damages Provision in a Surrender Agreement to Be an Unenforceable Penalty
In Trustees of Columbia Univ. in the City of N.Y. v. D’Agostino Supermarkets, Inc. , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 06937 (Nov. 24, 2020) ( here ), the New York Court of Appeals was asked to “consider the propriety of a liquidated damages provision in a Surrender Agreement between two New York City icons: Columbia University, one of the City’s premier universities, and D’Agostino Supermarkets, a family-owned food market chain founded in 1932.” Slip Op. at *1. D’Agostino had leased proper
admin
Nov 30, 202010 min read
Court Holds The McCoys Were On Inquiry Notice of Defendants’ Alleged Fraud
Hang on Sloopy was a hit song in the mid-1960s. Years later, the band that performed and recorded the song – the McCoys – claimed that they were cheated out of substantial sums of money due to fraud. That claim, however, was time-barred, held the Court in Derringer v F.G.G. Prods. Inc. , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 33854(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County Nov. 18, 2020) ( here ). Fraud claims must be commenced within “the greater of six years from the date the cause of action accrued or two ye
admin
Nov 25, 20207 min read
First Department Affirms Finding That Transfer of Property to Newly Created Company To Avoid Foreclosure Judgment Fraudulent For Purposes of Former DCL § 276
Sometimes, a case involves facts and circumstances that, on their face, lead a court to determine that a fraud was committed. Such was the case in First Franklin Fin. Corp. v. Merchant , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 06852 (1st Dept. Nov. 19, 2020) ( here ). In First Franklin , a judgment debtor transferred property subject to a foreclosure sale to a company that he had formed all on the same day. Such facts and circumstances, said the lower court, represented “badges of fraud” under f
admin
Nov 23, 20204 min read
THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY HAS PROMULGATED NEW RULES, EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 23, 2020, TO ADDRESS THE COURT SYSTEM’S RESPONSE TO THE RECENT SURGE IN COVID-19 CASES
On November 4, 2020, this Blog (the “November 4 Blog”) provided an update on the New York State Court system’s preparation for the anticipated surge in COVID-19 cases. On November 18, 2020, Andrew A. Crecca, the District Administrative Judge for the 10 th Judicial District (Suffolk County), circulated a memorandum on “Suffolk County Updated Operating Protocols <“the plan”> Effective November 23, 2020” (the “Memorandum”). As noted in the November 4 Blog, “the country has
admin
Nov 20, 20203 min read
Enforcement News: Investment Advisory Firms and Dually-Registered Broker-Dealers Charged in Connection with Sales of Unsuitable Exchange-Traded Products
Brokerage firms, financial institutions and investment advisers are required to provide suitable investment recommendations and strategies to a customer that are consistent with the customer’s investment objectives, risk tolerance and financial needs. See , e.g. , here and here (FINRA Rule 2111). This requirement is based on the “know your customer” rule ( here (FINRA Rule 2090)), which requires brokerage firms, financial institutions and investment professionals to be awa
admin
Nov 18, 20204 min read
It’s (Former) DCL Day In The Second Department (DCL §§ 273, 275 and 276 To Be Exact)
On April 4, 2020, the New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“NYUVTA”) became effective, replacing Article 10, Sections 270-281 of the Debtor and Creditor Law (“DCL”), the State’s almost century-old fraudulent conveyance law. In February of this year, this Blog examined the NYUVTA, the DCL and the changes the NYUVTA made to the DCL ( here ). Since the NYUVTA applies to cases filed on or after April 4, 2020, there remain many cases under the former DCL that are being li
admin
Nov 16, 20207 min read
FIRST DEPARTMENT HOLDS THAT LISTING A MORTGAGE DEBT ON A BANKRUPTCY SCHEDULE IS NOT AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT SUFFICIENT TO RESTART AN OTHERWISE EXPIRED STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS UNDER GOL 17-101 OR 17-105(1)
This BLOG has previously addressed issues related to Statutes of Limitations. See, among many others, < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , and < HERE =">HERE</a>"> . Earlier this year, this BLOG posted “ Revive A Time-Barred Claim Using § 17-101 of New York’s General Obligations Law ”, in which, in addition tothe renewal of expired Statutes of Limitation under GOL § 17–101, the purpose and history of Statutes of Limitation was addressed. St
admin
Nov 13, 20206 min read
Together We Stand: Court Holds Breach of Contract and Fraudulent Inducement Claims Can Stand Together
A “recurring question” courts in New York grapple with is whether the facts alleged in a complaint give rise to sustainable claims for both breach of contract and fraudulent inducement. Cronos Grp. v. XComIP, LLC , 156 A.D.3d 54, 56 (1st Dept. 2017). Readers of this Blog know that a fraud claim, which “ar from the same facts , s identical damages and d not allege a breach of any duty collateral to or independent of the parties’ agreements<,> is subject to dismissal as red
admin
Nov 11, 20207 min read
bottom of page
