top of page
Fraud


Unconditional Means Unconditional: The First Department Enforces a Promissory Note and Rejects a Fraud Defense
CPLR 3213 provides an expedited path to judgment on an “instrument for the payment of money only,” but disputes often arise when a promissory note grows out of a broader contractual relationship. Two questions then become critical: whether the note contains a standalone, unconditional obligation to pay, and whether defenses based on the underlying agreement defeat summary enforcement. A related issue arises when the maker characterizes the other party’s alleged nonperformance

Jeffrey Haber
2 hours ago8 min read


General Business Law § 349 Does Not Apply to Private Contract Disputes
General Business Law § 349 was promulgated to address “the impact of deceptive conduct on consumer purchases [and, therefore,] prohibits deceptive acts and practices that misrepresent the nature or quality of products and services.”

Jonathan Freiberger
Oct 95 min read


Enforcement News: SEC Alleges Mississippi Cannabis Founder Misappropriated Nearly $2 Million of Investor Funds
Material misrepresentations, omissions, and misuse of investor funds can give rise to securities fraud liability, regardless of the industry in which the offering occurs.

Jeffrey Haber
Oct 76 min read


First Department Rejects Fraud Claim Predicated on Allegations from Another Action
In Delgado v. 27-51 Jackson Ave. LLC, 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 05593 (1st Dept. Oct. 1, 2026), the Appellate Division, First Department reaffirmed that fraud claims must be based on particularized facts, not suspicion, guilt by association, or allegations from other lawsuits. The Court held that unproven accusations in separate actions were insufficient to establish that the plaintiff made any misrepresentation.

Jeffrey Haber
Oct 55 min read


The Same Loss, a Different Theory: The Duplication Doctrine Applied in a Fraudulent Inducement and Malpractice Action
In Franco v. Berger, 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 05472 (1st Dept. Sept. 29, 2026), the plaintiff sought to recover for the death of Coco, a 3.8-pound Yorkshire Terrier who allegedly underwent a dental procedure only after defendants made specific representations concerning who would perform the surgery, who would administer anesthesia, and the safety precautions that would be employed.

Jeffrey Haber
Sep 306 min read


Does “Stone Ground Wheat” Mean Whole Grain? A New York Court Examines Consumer Expectations Under GBL §§ 349 and 350
New York’s consumer protection statutes, General Business Law (“GBL”) §§ 349 and 350, prohibit materially deceptive business practices and false advertising directed at consumers.

Jeffrey Haber
Sep 289 min read


Fair Consideration Remains the Critical Defense in New York Fraudulent Transfer Litigation
New York’s former Debtor and Creditor Law (“DCL”) imposed a straightforward but powerful rule: transfers made by an insolvent debtor without fair consideration may be set aside for the benefit of creditors. A recent decision from the Appellate Division, Second Department, underscores the principle that defendants seeking dismissal of fraudulent conveyance claims at the summary judgment stage must prove that the transfers they received were supported by fair consideration.

Jeffrey Haber
Aug 195 min read


The Second Department Reinforces a Fundamental Precept of Fraud Litigation: Reliance by the Plaintiff Is Required
By: Jeffrey M. Haber
One element of a fraud claim under New York law is justifiable reliance. A plaintiff must allege not only that a material misrepresentation was made, but also that the plaintiff actually relied upon that misrepresentation to its detriment. Reliance by a third party is insufficient.

Jeffrey Haber
Aug 179 min read


Sophisticated Parties, Justifiable Reliance, and a Signed Release: A Roadmap to Dismissal
New York strongly favors the enforcement of releases. Courts routinely recognize that a valid release serves an important purpose by bringing certainty and finality to disputes, allowing parties to resolve claims and move forward without the threat of future litigation. Indeed, broadly worded releases are often enforced according to their terms,.

Jeffrey Haber
Aug 39 min read


“Nothing Is Changed”: Justifiable Reliance in a Family Business Battle
In closely held family businesses, trust often substitutes for formalities. This phenomenon was on display in Homapour v. 3M Props., LLC, 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 04371 (1st Dept. July 9, 2026), where the formality of “read-before-you-sign” was tested. The dispute centered on allegations that a managing member repeatedly presented family members with signature pages detached from amended LLC operating agreements while assuring them that “nothing had changed.”

Jeffrey Haber
Jul 134 min read


Fraud Notes: Timeliness in Fraud Litigation – Discovery Rule Saves Some Claims, Bars Others
In today’s Fraud Notes, we examine two recent appellate court decisions that highlight the role statutes of limitations play in fraud-based claims. Specifically, we explore how New York courts evaluate timeliness under CPLR 213(8), including the six-year limitations period and the two-year discovery rule, as well as the three-year limitations period governing General Business Law § 349 claims.

Jeffrey Haber
Jun 267 min read


Fraud: Releases, Anti-Reliance Clauses, and the Special Facts Doctrine
In today’s article, we examine the interplay between releases, anti-reliance clauses, and the special facts doctrine under New York law, using the Appellate Division, First Department’s decision in Leinhardt v. Socure, Inc., 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 03881 (1st Dept. June 18, 2026), as a focal point. The case addresses a recurring tension in fraud litigation: whether a party who later claims to have been misled can overcome the barriers imposed by a broad release and explicit discla

Jeffrey Haber
Jun 229 min read


Caveat Emptor in an “As Is” World: Fraud in The Purchase and Sale of Real Property
In New York, the doctrine of caveat emptor — “let the buyer beware” — remains an important principle in residential real estate transactions. Unlike many other states that require extensive seller disclosures, New York adheres to a more traditional approach: absent fraud, active concealment, or a special relationship, a seller has no general duty to volunteer information about defective conditions in the property.

Jeffrey Haber
Jun 177 min read


Enforcement News: SEC Cracks Down on Misuse of Investor Funds in Investment Pools
On June 5, 2026, the SEC charged an investment adviser and related entities with a multi-year fraud involving a pooled investment fund that raised about $4 million from 28 investors. The SEC alleged the defendant misappropriated and commingled funds, concealed losses exceeding $3.6 million, and diverted assets for personal use.

Jeffrey Haber
Jun 158 min read


Fraud Allegations Dismissed Due To Bankruptcy Non-Disclosure
In Rubin v. Hodes, the Appellate Division, Second Department, affirmed the dismissal of fraud and loan repayment claims brought by a former majority shareholder of a healthcare company. However, the courts never reached the merits of those claims because the plaintiff failed to disclose his stock interests and promissory notes in a prior bankruptcy proceeding.

Jeffrey Haber
Jun 16 min read


First Department Affirms Dismissal of Alter Ego Allegations Based on Conclusory Pleading
Under New York law, alter ego liability, often referred to as piercing the corporate veil, is a doctrine that permits a court to disregard the corporate form and hold an individual officer, director, or owner liable where that person exercised domination and control over the entity and used that domination and control to commit a fraud or wrong that injured the plaintiff.

Jeffrey Haber
May 277 min read


When Fraud Is Not Redundant: The Intersection of Merger Clauses and Duplicative Claims Doctrine
Merger clauses and the duplication of claims doctrine often operate to limit the availability of fraudulent inducement claims alongside breach of contract claims.

Jeffrey Haber
May 257 min read


Enforcement News: Affinity Fraud on U.S. Naval Personnel
Affinity fraud is a form of financial fraud that relies on social connections and trust. It most often occurs within identifiable groups, such as religious, cultural, or ethnic communities, or social organizations, where members share common values, experiences, or identities. Rather than approaching targets as strangers, those promoting the scheme position themselves as insiders, using familiarity and perceived credibility to create comfort and reduce skepticism.

Jeffrey Haber
May 116 min read


Disclosure as Defense: When Written Offering Materials Negate Claims of Fraudulent Misrepresentation
In Cortlandt St. Recovery Corp. v. TPG Capital Mgt., L.P., 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 02775 (1st Dept. May 5, 2026), the Appellate Division, First Department, examined the limits of fraud claims arising from complex private‑equity financing transactions.

Jeffrey Haber
May 66 min read


Conclusory Claims Fall Short: Second Department Dismisses Fraud and GBL § 349 Claims Against Insurance Adjuster
Conclusory allegations, even when bolstered by informal communications, such as text messages, will not substitute for well-pleaded facts showing materially misleading conduct or a specific misrepresentation.

Jeffrey Haber
May 35 min read
bottom of page
