By: Jeffrey M. Haber In a prior post, we examined the impact of proofreading failures when drafting an agreement ( here ). In MAK Technology Holdings Inc. v. Anyvision Interactive Technologies Ltd. , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op 03376 (June 20, 2024) ( here ), the Court of Appeals examined a similar issue – whether typographical errors, grammatical mistakes, or other obvious errors render a contract ambiguous. In a 4-3 decision, written by Judge Cannataro, the Court held that grammatica

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Noto v. Planck, LLC , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 03340 (1st Dept. June 18, 2024) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department examined an at-will employee’s decision to refrain from leaving his employment with the company that employed him and whether that decision constituted consideration sufficient to support the formation of a contract. As discussed, the First Department held that such action sufficed. Noto arose from an alleged agreement whereby d

By: Jeffrey M. Haber To state a cause of action for fraud, a plaintiff must allege “a material misrepresentation of a fact, knowledge of its falsity, an intent to induce reliance, justifiable reliance by the plaintiff and damages.” 1 The allegations must be stated with particularity to satisfy CPLR 3016(b). 2 Thus, the plaintiff must provide sufficient facts to support a “reasonable inference” that the allegations of fraud are true. 3 Conclusory allegations will not suffic

By: Jeffrey M. Haber When parties enter into a contract, each assumes that the language in their agreement accurately memorializes their understandings and intentions. For this reason, when a dispute arises, the courts in New York look to the intent of the parties as expressed by the language they chose to put into their writing. 1 A clear, complete document will be enforced according to its terms. 2 When the parties have a dispute over the meaning of their contract, the cou

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Cline v. Grodin , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 02586 (1st Dept. May 9, 2024) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department was asked to consider whether an agreement involving a limited partnership permitted the general partner to employ and compensate others, including the limited partners, to run the day-to-day business operations of the limited partnership. As discussed below, the Court answered the question in the affirmative. Cline involved Alcova Cap

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Nosegbe v. Charles , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 02406 (4th Dept. May 3, 2024) ( here ), the Appellate Division, Fourth Department affirmed the dismissal of a fraud claim because the plaintiff failed to identify the statement claimed to be false. The Court also reinstated a claim that the motion court dismissed on the grounds that, inter alia , the text message on which the lower court relied was not documentary evidence within the meaning of CPLR 3211(a)(1). W

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Lane’s Floor Coverings & Interiors, Inc. v. DiLalla , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 02257 (1st Dept. Apr. 25, 2024) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department considered an alleged scheme to defraud plaintiff by using checks that were fake or missing endorsements. As discussed below, the Court modified the motion court’s order dismissing the action to deny defendants’ motion as to the fraud claims asserted against Defendant Anthony DiLalla, the branch man

By: Jeffrey M. Haber The doctrine of successor jurisdiction provides that when two entities merge, the successor entity inherits the merged entity’s jurisdictional status for purposes of specific jurisdiction ( i.e. , personal jurisdiction). Thus, if the merged entity was subject to jurisdiction in a particular forum, then the successor would also be subject to the court’s jurisdiction, regardless of whether the successor entity would otherwise be subject to the court’s juris

By: Jeffrey M. Haber The foundation of virtually every business and commercial transaction is a contract. It is difficult to imagine a transaction for the purchase or sale of goods, the merger or acquisition of a business, or the provision of services that is not based upon a contract. There is almost nothing more costly to businesses and their owners than a dispute regarding the meaning of a contract. Such disputes often arise over the performance or non-performance of a te

By Jeffery Haber There are four primary levels of services provided by an accountant with respect to an entity’s financial statements: preparation, compilation, review, and audit. A preparation engagement is a basic one. In this level of service, the accountant assists management or the business owner in preparing financial statements for internal use. In a compilation engagement, the accountant assists management or the business owner in the presentation of the entity’s fi

By: Jeffrey M. Haber Attorneys are often asked by their clients if they can sue for attorney’s fees. Whether attorney’s fees may be recovered in litigation depends on the circumstances. Under the general rule, attorney’s fees are incidents of litigation, and the prevailing party may not collect them from the loser unless an award is authorized by agreement between the parties, statute or court rule. 1 In LMM Capital Partners, LLC v. Mill Point Capital, LLC , 2024 N.Y. Slip O

By: Jeffrey M. Haber It is not often that we examine a case involving the doctrine of champerty. The last time we did so was on March 8, 2023 ( here ). We also examined the champerty doctrine in 2021 ( here ), 2020 ( here ), and 2016 ( here ). Today, we examine the champerty doctrine in our discussion of IKB Intl. S.A. v. Morgan Stanley , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 01675 (1st Dept. Mar. 26, 2024) ( here ). Champerty is the prohibited practice of purchasing claims for the purpose of

By Jonathan H. Freiberger On March 19, 2024, the Court of Appeals decided Favourite Limited v. Cico , a case concerning “the proper scope of the trial court's discretion to grant leave to amend a complaint under CPLR 3025 (b) .” (Hyperlink added.) [Eds. Note: this BLOG has previously addressed CPLR 3025 < here =">here</a>"> , < here =">here</a>"> , < here =">here</a>"> and < here =">here</a>"> . This BLOG has previously explained that CPLR 3025(b) provides, in pertinent p

By: Jeffrey M. Haber As we have often explained in the articles in which we have examined the duplication doctrine, fraud claims that are nothing more than contract claims dressed up in fraud clothing, are subject to dismissal. E.g. , here , here , here , and here . Thus, courts will apply the doctrine when a plaintiff alleges a breach of contract claim and a fraud claim that arise from the same facts and circumstances. When that happens, the fraud claim will be deemed du

In commercial and business litigation, it is common for plaintiffs to assert claims against a business entity for wrongs committed by a corporate entity. Often, plaintiffs will try to “pierce the corporate veil,” or get behind the corporate form, to hold the entity’s officers or members liable for the alleged wrongdoing.

By: Jeffrey M. Haber It should go without saying that people make mistakes. After all, people are human, and humans make mistakes. When people draft a document, especially a lengthy or complex one, it is not uncommon for a mistake to be made. Lawyers who draft contracts and other written instruments are not immune from this phenomenon. Given the steps a lawyer must take to draft and finalize an agreement or other written instrument there are numerous opportunities for unin

By Jonathan H. Freiberger This BLOG has written numerous times on issues related to statutes of limitation in mortgage foreclosure actions. See, e.g., [ here ], [ here ], [ here ], [ here ], [ here ], [ here ], [ here ], [ here ] and [ here ]. As previously described in this BLOG an action to foreclose a mortgage is governed by a six-year statute of limitations. CPLR 213(4) . See also Fed. Nat. Mort. Assoc. v. Schmitt , 172 A.D.3d 1324, 1325 (2 nd Dep’t 2019). When

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In New York, “a valid release constitutes a complete bar to an action on a claim which is the subject of the release.” If “the language of a release is clear and unambiguous, the signing of a release is a ‘jural act’ binding on the parties.” For this reason, “ release should never be converted into a starting point for … litigation except under circumstances and under rules which would render any other result a grave injustice.” In New York, “a releas

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Rosenberg v. OSG, LLC , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 00691 (1st Dept. Feb. 8, 2024) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department underscored the insufficiency of pleading a fraud claim on information and belief. In affirming the dismissal of plaintiffs’ fraudulent inducement claim, the Court held that such pleading was “per se defective.” 1 Rosenberg is a class action arising out of plaintiffs’ participation in the Odyssey Study Group (“OSG”), which is ru

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In 245 E. 19 Realty LLC v. 245 E. 19th St. Parking LLC , 2024 N.Y. Slip Op. 00368 (1st Dept. Jan. 30, 2024) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department examined a couple of issues frequently discussed in this Blog: veil piercing/alter ego liability and fraudulent transfers. As to the issue of fraudulent transfers, 245 E. 19 Realty provides us with the opportunity to examine a case involving the new Debtor and Creditor Law (“DCL”), which became ef