top of page
All Posts
Contract Precludes Plaintiff From Recovering Lost Profit Damages Due to Alleged Breach
It is not uncommon for parties in commercial transactions to include in their contracts a provision that limits the types of damages recoverable in the event of a breach. Typically, these provisions include a limitation on the recovery of lost profits. An example of such a provision, drawn from the agreement in Fresenius Kabi USA, LLC v. Hetero USA, Inc. , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 03285 (1st Dept. June 11, 2020) ( here ), provides: “no party shall be liable to the other party for i
admin
Jul 1, 20206 min read
Conditional Acceptance, Conflicting Testimony and An Alleged Oral Agreement
In prior posts, we examined the rules of contract formation. In our most recent post on the subject ( here ), we considered a case in which one of the issues before the court was whether there was an exchange of consideration sufficient to support the formation of a contract. Today, we examine Galarneau v. D’Andrea , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 03584 (3d Dept. June 25, 2020) ( here ), a case in which the Appellate Division, Third Department was asked to consider whether plaintiff demo
admin
Jun 29, 20206 min read
UPDATE ON TEMPORARY NEW YORK STATE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL FORECLOSURE PROTOCOLS
Recognizing the “continuing restrictions on the filing and prosecution of foreclosure matters in New York State arising during the course of the COVID-19 public health emergency,” on June 23, 2020, Chief Administrative Judge Lawrence K. Marks issued a memorandum (the “June 23 Memorandum”) on temporary protocols (the “Protocols”) for residential and commercial foreclosure proceedings. The temporary protocols became effective as of June 24, 2020. The Protocols are as follows:
admin
Jun 26, 20202 min read
Second Department Considers A Contract Dispute Claimed to Be Dressed Up in the Language of Fraud
It is well settled that a plaintiff may not “dress up a breach-of-contract claim as a fraud claim.” Cohen v. Koenig , 25 F.3d 1168, 1173 (2d Cir. 1994) (internal quotation marks omitted). In prior posts, we referred to this principle as the duplication of claims doctrine ( here , here and here ). In order for a tort claim to be actionable, there must be “a legal duty independent of the contract” that “has been violated.” Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v. Long Is. R.R. Co. , 70 N.Y
admin
Jun 25, 20204 min read
Documentary Evidence, Breach of Contract and Common-Law Indemnification
In Pizzarotti, LLC v. Phipps & Co. , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 50696(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County June 17, 2020) ( here ), Justice Gerald Lebovits of the Supreme Court, New York County, recently addressed a number of issues that we often examine, among them, a motion to dismiss on the basis of documentary evidence, breach of contract and common-law indemnification. We examine these issues and Pizzarotti below. Dismissal on the Basis of Documentary Evidence Under CPLR § 3211(a), a par
admin
Jun 24, 202010 min read
Who, What, Where and How – The Foundation of Every Fraud Claim
Just recently, we wrote about the importance of pleading fraud with particularity ( here ). As readers of this Blog know, when fraud is alleged, the plaintiff must plead the claim with particularity. Under CPLR § 3016 (b), the circumstances constituting fraud must be stated with sufficient detail “to permit a reasonable inference of the alleged conduct.” Pludeman v. Northern Leasing Sys., Inc. , 10 N.Y.3d 486, 491 (2008) (citation omitted). To satisfy the particularity requi
admin
Jun 22, 20207 min read
FORECLOSING MORTGAGEES SHOULD BE CAREFUL TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH RPAPL 1303 WHEN MOVING FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
As noted on numerous occasions in this BLOG, the New York State Legislature has responded to the residential foreclosure crisis by promulgating a series of rules designed to protect residential homeowners. These rules, however, place additional burdens on foreclosing lenders and courts throughout New York State have demonstrated little sympathy for foreclosing lenders that fail to follow these rules. For example, RPAPL 1304 requires that at least ninety days prior to commen
admin
Jun 19, 20203 min read
Failure to Plead Statements of Present Fact, Among Other Deficiencies, Results in Dismissal of Fraud and Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claims
In today’s post we examine, SHIR Capital, LLC v. Fortress Credit Advisors LLC , 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 31825(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County June 11, 2020) ( here ), a case involving an alleged fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and misappropriation of trade secrets. We chose to SHIR Capital because of its common theme – pleading with particularity. As discussed below, pleading fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and the misappropriation of trade secrets requires particularity or specifici
admin
Jun 17, 20206 min read
Choice of Law: Always a Thorny Issue
What law should apply? In most cases, answering the question is more art than science. In contract cases, especially in complex commercial matters, the agreement at issue often (though not always) contains a choice of law provision. In that circumstance, the agreement will provide that any disputes related to the contract and/or its performance will be litigated under the laws of the jurisdiction identified in the contract. When there is no choice of law provision, a more co
admin
Jun 15, 20209 min read
bottom of page
