top of page
All Posts
Business Judgment Rule Bars Claim That Board Treated Shareholder Differently Than Other Shareholders
By: Jeffrey M. Haber It has long been the law that the business judgment rule applies to the decisions made by boards of directors of residential cooperatives and condominiums. “The business judgment rule ‘bars judicial inquiry into actions of corporate directors taken in good faith and in the exercise of honest judgment in the lawful and legitimate furtherance of corporate purposes.’” “ ourts must defer to a board’s determination if it was taken in furtherance of the corpo
admin
Apr 14, 20257 min read
RPAPL 1501(4) and the Mortgagee in Possession Doctrine
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger Today’s article addresses a property owner’s right to cancel a recorded mortgage pursuant to RPAPL 1501(4) and whether a mortgagee is “is entitled to recover sums expended to preserve and maintain an allegedly abandoned property under equitable and quasi-contractual theories.” As discussed in prior articles, mortgages on real property are frequently delivered to lenders to stand as security for the repayment obligations evidenced by a promissory no
admin
Apr 11, 20257 min read
After Non-Jury Trial, Court Finds Defendants Committed Fraudulent Acts in Connection with The Construction of a Resort Complex in The Bahamas
By: Jeffrey M. Haber On July 8, 2019, this Blog wrote an article titled, “First Department Unanimously Affirms Denial of Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Dismiss Fraud Claims” ( here ). The article examined the decision of the Appellate Division, First Department in BML Properties Ltd. v. China Construction America Inc. , 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 05339 (1st Dept. July 2, 2019), in which the Court (as the title states) affirmed the denial of a motion to compel arbitration
admin
Apr 8, 20256 min read
Jurisdictional Defects and The Dismissal of Fraud-Based Claims on Limitations Grounds
By: Jeffrey M. Haber On April 3, 2025, the Appellate Division, First Department considered an appeal of the dismissal of a complaint involving the disputed authenticity of a painting (the “Work”) by the deceased artist Cy Twombly (“Twombly”). In Grosso v. Cy Twombly Found. , 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 02007 (Apr. 03, 2025) ( here ), the Court unanimously affirmed the motion court’s dismissal of a complaint brought by the child of a parent who purchased works of art, including the Wor
admin
Apr 6, 202512 min read
Change of Venue, Convenience of Witnesses and Burdens of Proof
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger The term “venue” in the context of litigation refers to the location where the trial will take place. In general, and as previously described in prior articles, Venue, which is governed by Article 5 of the CPLR , is initially chosen by the plaintiff at the commencement of the action. Sometimes an improper venue is chosen by the plaintiff. In such circumstances, the defendant can move to change venue to a proper venue. CPLR 510(1) ; see also Kidd v.
admin
Apr 4, 20255 min read
Scope of Court Proceedings Limited By Parties’ Agreement
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Idi v. Sela , 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 01890 (1st Dept. Apr. 1, 2025) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department addressed an issue of contract interpretation that this Blog often examines: enforcing written agreements that are complete, clear, and unambiguous on their face. Under New York law, written agreements are construed in accordance with the parties’ intent . “The best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in
admin
Apr 2, 20257 min read
Who Decides Arbitrability? It Depends on The Agreement – Revisited
By: Jeffrey M. Haber Arbitration is an alternative to a court proceeding. It is an adversarial proceeding in which the parties can call witnesses and present evidence to a neutral arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. The rules of discovery and evidence are relaxed to make it a more cost-efficient process. Typically, arbitrations are conducted by a private firm in which an attorney or retired judge, selected by the parties, presides over the proceeding. Arbitration can be bindi
admin
Mar 31, 20257 min read
Why Do You Think They Are Called “Necessary Defendants” In Mortgage Foreclosure Actions?
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger There are certain categories of individuals and entities that are required to be named as defendants in mortgage foreclosure actions and the failure to name such “necessary defendants” can have serious implications. New York’s Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law § 1311 , which sets forth such “necessary defendants,” provides: Each of the following persons, whose interest is claimed to be subject and subordinate to the plaintiff's lien, shall
admin
Mar 28, 20254 min read
Enforcement News: SEC Charges Investment Adviser and His Firm with Violating Prior Settlement, Causing $1.6 million in Damages to Fund
By: Jeffrey M. Haber An investment company is a company that issues securities and primarily invests in securities. Among the securities laws applicable to investment companies, is the Investment Company Act (“ICA”). Congress enacted the ICA to provide for the registration and regulation of investment companies to protect investors from purchasing securities without the benefit of certain information about the securities, the investment company, and its management. An investm
admin
Mar 24, 20256 min read
Improperly “Serving” a Notice to Appoint a New Attorney on Borrower Pursuant to CPLR 321(c), Did Not Serve the Lender Well in a Mortgage Foreclosure Action
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger Today’s article relates to CPLR 321(c) , a topic we have addressed before < here =">here</a>"> and < here =">here</a>"> . As previously discussed in this BLOG, once an attorney appears and becomes the attorney of record, the client is free to change counsel by filing with the clerk, a substitution of counsel stipulation, which must also be served on “the attorneys for all parties in the action or, if a party appears without an attorney, to the par
admin
Mar 21, 20254 min read
Sparse Allegations of Material Misrepresentations and An Insincere Promise to Perform Under a Contract Held Not Sufficient to State a Claim for Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement
By: Jeffrey M. Haber To state a claim for fraud, a plaintiff must allege “a misrepresentation or a material omission of fact which was false and known to be false by defendant, made for the purpose of inducing the other party to rely upon it, justifiable reliance of the other party on the misrepresentation or material omission, and injury.” The claim must pleaded with particularity. Conclusory allegations will not suffice. Neither will allegations based on information and
admin
Mar 19, 20257 min read
Fraud Claims Found to Be Duplicative of Contract Claim Because of An Overlap in Facts and Circumstances and Damages
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Crawford v. Integrated Asset Mgt. Servs., LLC , 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 01352 (2d Dept. Mar. 12, 2025) ( here ), the Appellate Division, Second Department reversed the denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ fraud-based claims, among others, involving a home improvement project in Brooklyn, N.Y., on the grounds of duplication with the plaintiff’s breach of contract claims. Crawford is notable because the Court held that the fraud damage
admin
Mar 17, 20254 min read
“867-5309” (The “Jenny” Principle and The Importance of Phone Numbers)
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger The title for today’s article refers to one of the most played songs by DJs at college parties, and VJs on the fledgling MTV Network, in the very early eighties. My hope in writing today’s article is that all readers of this BLOG in their 50s and early 60s are inspired to call the number 867-5309 and leave voice mail messages about RPAPL 1304 , the subject of today’s article. This BLOG has frequently written about mortgage foreclosure actions, in ge
admin
Mar 14, 20255 min read
Fraud Notes: Justifiable Reliance, Particularity and Duplication
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Imperium Blue Acquisition Partners, LLC v. Marathon Asset Mgt., L.P. , 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 01317 (1st Dept. Mar. 11, 2025) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department was asked to consider whether, among other things, plaintiffs satisfied the justifiable reliance element of a fraud claim. As discussed below, the Court held that plaintiffs failed to do so. In Essential Home Remodeling, Inc. v. Rossin , 2025 N.Y. Slip Op. 01314 (1st Dept. Mar. 11,
admin
Mar 12, 20258 min read
Res Judicata Barred Subsequent Action To Quiet Title Because It Involved Essentially The Same Causes of Action As Asserted In An Earlier Action
By: Jeffrey M. Haber Previously, this Blog examined the doctrine of res judicata ( here , here , here and here ). Under the doctrine, a party may not litigate a claim where a judgment on the merits exists from a prior action between the same parties involving the same subject matter. The doctrine applies not only to claims actually litigated but also to claims that could have been raised in the prior litigation. The rationale underlying the doctrine is that a party who h
admin
Mar 8, 20254 min read
“Just Once”[1] (The Second Department Reiterates That There is No Need to File an Answer to a Supplemental Complaint When an Answer was Interpose...
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger “Just Once,” which is an appropriate title for today’s article, is a James Ingram song from Quincy Jones’ “The Dude” album; an album I have listened to many times throughout, and after, college. Today we will discuss U.S. Bank National Assoc. v. Deblinger , a mortgage foreclosure action that resulted in a decision on February 26, 2025, by the Appellate Division, Second Department. In 2017, the lender commenced an action to foreclose a mortgage afte
admin
Feb 28, 20253 min read
Enforcement News: SEC Brings Enforcement Action Against Investment Adviser and Firm for Not Disclosing Increased Fees
By: Jeffrey M. Haber An investment adviser is a fiduciary, and as such is held to the highest standard of conduct and must act in the best interest of his/her client. This means, among other things, that an investment adviser has an affirmative duty of utmost good faith and full and fair disclosure of all material facts. In broad terms, an investment adviser owes its client the duty of care, loyalty, and candor. The duty of care includes, among other things, the duty to provi
admin
Feb 26, 20254 min read
Complaint Dismissed Because Notice Given to Oust General Partner Pursuant to Partnership Agreement Was Not Sent Derivatively
By: Jeffrey M. Haber It is well-settled that a plaintiff asserting a derivative claim seeks to recover for injury to the business entity, regardless of whether the entity is a corporation, limited liability company, or partnership. A plaintiff asserting a direct claim seeks redress for injury to himself/herself individually. “The distinction between derivative and direct claims is grounded upon the principle that does not have an individual cause of action that derives from
admin
Feb 24, 20257 min read
bottom of page
