top of page
All Posts
Fraud Notes: N.Y. Supreme Courts Address Fraud and Fraudulent Inducement Claims
Readers of this Blog know that we like to write about fraud cases. After all, a fraud can be perpetrated in so many contexts. Indeed, the circumstances upon which one can deceive another are limited only by the imagination of the wrongdoer. Sometimes, there are too many reported decisions for us to examine in the depth to which our readers have become accustomed. For this reason, we have created the “Fraud Notes” post in which we will examine multiple decisions addressing fra
admin
Feb 10, 20209 min read
THE SECOND DEPARTMENT DECIDES INTERESTING ISSUES UNDER RPAPL §1304
On numerous occasions, this Blog has addressed issues surrounding certain notice obligations imposed on mortgage lenders foreclosing on residential property. For example, section 1303 of the Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law (“RPAPL”) requires that, under certain circumstances relating to residential property, a foreclosing mortgagee must send statutory notice to the mortgagor and tenants advising them, among other things, that they are in danger of losing their hom
admin
Feb 7, 20204 min read
Fourth Department Vacates Portion of Arbitral Award Because Arbitrator Exceeded His Authority
In New York, arbitration, like other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, is valid and enforceable. Westinghouse v. New York City Tr. Auth. , 82 N.Y.2d 47, 54 (1993) (“Considerable authority thus supports the validity and enforceability of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.”). Like many jurisdictions, New York has a strong public policy that favors arbitration. In fact, arbitration is not only favored but encouraged “as an effective and expeditious means of reso
admin
Feb 5, 20204 min read
Enforcement News: SEC Charges Accountant with Affinity Fraud
Investment scams come in many forms. Affinity fraud is one type of investment scam. In this form of fraud, the person committing the fraud preys upon members of an identifiable group, such as a religious or ethnic community, the elderly, or a professional group. The promoter of an affinity fraud frequently is – or pretends to be – a member or a good friend of the group. The fraudster often enlists respected members of the community or religious leaders from within the group t
admin
Feb 3, 20205 min read
NEW YORK SUPREME COURT ANALYZES WHETHER AN “OWNER” CAN ALSO BE A “CONTRACTOR” FOR LIEN LAW TRUST FUND DIVERSION PURPOSES
In this Blog’s post entitled: “ Real Property Owners and Contractors should be Aware of the Trust Fund Provisions of New York’s Lien Law ,” the trust fund provisions of New York’s lien law were discussed. A brief recap of this Blog’s prior post as it relates to this post may be informative. Lien Law §71 recognizes two types of trusts – (1) the owner trust and (2) the contractor/subcontractor trust. The assets of the owner trust “shall be held and applied to the cost of im
admin
Jan 31, 20205 min read
Court Holds Text Message Inadmissible Evidence to Support Breach of Contract Claim
Commercial transactions by their nature involve contracts. Sometimes, the parties involved in such transactions will dispute the meaning of their agreement. It may be that the language used is ambiguous; or the language is reasonably clear but is susceptible to different meanings; or although the language is clear, taken literally, it might not reflect the parties’ intent; or, as is often the case, an event has occurred that was not contemplated by the parties at the time of
admin
Jan 29, 20208 min read
Statute of Limitations, The Continuing Wrong Doctrine and an Alleged Fraudulent Insurance Scheme
Statutes of limitations limit the duration of a defendant’s liability for all types of alleged wrongdoing. Plaintiffs who do not pursue their rights within the limitation period will find the courthouse doors closed to their claims. For this reason, whether the statute of limitations has run can be an important topic of discussion between a lawyer and her client. The statute of limitations for a fraudulent inducement claim is the greater of (a) six years from the date when t
admin
Jan 27, 202011 min read


First Department Affirms Dismissal of Fraudulent Inducement Claims Due to Disclaimer Clauses and Failure to Plead Justifiable Reliance
On January 23, 2020, the Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the dismissal of fraud-based claims alleged in connection with the purchase of a promissory note that memorialized a $1.5 million loan.

Jeffrey Haber
Jan 24, 20206 min read
Attorney-Client Privilege and The Functional-Equivalent Doctrine
“The attorney-client privilege shields from disclosure any confidential communications between an attorney and his or her client made for the purpose of obtaining or facilitating legal advice in the course of a professional relationship.” Ambac Assur. Corp. v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. , 27 N.Y.3d 616, 623 (2016). The privilege “fosters the open dialogue between lawyer and client that is deemed essential to effective representation.” Spectrum Sys. Intl. Corp. v. Chemical B
admin
Jan 22, 20209 min read
Enforcement News: SEC Charges Consultant with Operating a Long-Running Ponzi-Like Scheme That Raised At Least $75 Million from Hundreds of Investors
Ponzi schemes remain a familiar and unfortunate risk for investors. Because Ponzi schemes purport to offer high returns with little or no risk, and rely on inflated credentials of a financial professional, investors are attracted to the investment products these scammers offer. The most notorious Ponzi scheme in recent years was perpetrated by Bernie Madoff. In 2016, there were 59 Ponzi schemes uncovered in the United States, with losses totaling $2.4 billion, according to th
admin
Jan 20, 20203 min read
First Department Holds that Jury Waiver Provision in Contract Does Not Bar Jury Trial Demand When Agreement Alleged to Be Procured Through Fraud
On January 16, 2020, the Appellate Division, First Department recalled and vacated its September 17, 2019 decision in Ambac Assur. Corp. v Countrywide Home Loans Inc. , 175 A.D.3d 1156 (1st Dept. 2019), for the primary purpose of deciding whether the motion court properly denied Countrywide’s motion to strike Ambac’s jury demand on its fraudulent inducement cause of action. In its decision replacing the recalled and vacated decision (2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 00367 ( here )), the Fi
admin
Jan 16, 20205 min read
Court Holds Party Fails to Make Prima Facie Entitlement to Liquidated Damages Despite Breach of Agreement
Commercial contracts typically include a liquidated damages provision that allows for the payment of a predetermined amount of damages in the event of a breach by one of the parties. Courts will sustain such a provision if the liquidated amount is reasonably proportionate to the probable loss and the amount of actual loss is incapable or difficult of precise estimation. If, however, the amount fixed is grossly disproportionate to the probable loss, then the provision amounts
admin
Jan 15, 20208 min read
Court Denies Motion to Dismiss Defamation Claim, Explaining the Difference Between an Expression of Fact and Opinion
John loans Jane money to help Jane grow her company. Unfortunately, Jane fails to repay John as promised. John demands that the Jane repay him. In front of a group of people known to both John and Jane, John calls Jane a “scammer”, a “thief” and a “con artist.” John sues Jane for breach of contract and fraud. Jane counterclaims, alleging that John defamed her in front of their friends. The foregoing fact pattern is not uncommon. Prospective clients often tell lawyers of such
admin
Jan 13, 20207 min read
APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT, VALIDATES MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE DEFENDANTS’ CRIES OF “LEAVE ME ALONGE”
This Blog has addressed many issues related to mortgage foreclosure. < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> , < HERE =">HERE</a>"> and . As to the issues relating to the standing of a lender to commence a foreclosure action, this Blog has not
admin
Jan 10, 20204 min read
Court Determines That Internal Dissention Among Shareholders Sufficient to Warrant Judicial Dissolution of Commercial Real Property Sales Brokerage Business
New York’s Business Corporation Law (“BCL”) provides shareholders owning 50% or more of a corporation two paths to judicial dissolution: a) BCL § 1104 – deadlock at the board or shareholder level such that the corporation “cannot continue to function effectively, and no alternative exists but dissolution”; or b) BCL § 1104-a – where directors or those in control of the corporation have been guilty of illegal, fraudulent or oppressive actions toward the complaining shareholder
admin
Jan 8, 20205 min read
Court Considers Whether an LLC is the Holder of “Unsold Shares” Within the Meaning of a Cooperative’s Proprietary Lease
Under New York’s rules of contract interpretation, “when parties set down their agreement in a clear, complete document, their writing should be enforced according to its terms.” Riverside S. Planning Corp. v. CRP/Extell Riverside, L.P. , 13 N.Y.3d 398, 403 (2009); W.W.W. Assoc. v. Giancontieri , 77 N.Y.2d 157, 162 (1990). The courts are “extremely reluctant to interpret an agreement as impliedly stating something which the parties have neglected to specifically include.” Row
admin
Jan 6, 20209 min read
Court Imposes Personal Liability on The Managing Member of An LLC Under the Responsible Corporate Officer Doctrine
As discussed in previous Blog posts, business owners and entrepreneurs wishing to insulate themselves from personal liability for the acts taken in the name of their business can generally do so by forming a corporation ( e.g. , C-Corp. or an S-Corp.) or limited liability company (“LLC”). Such protection, however, is not absolute; there are exceptions to the rule. For instance, a creditor or other third party can “pierce the corporate veil” – i.e. , go behind the corporate fo
admin
Jan 3, 20207 min read
The Privity or Near-Privity Doctrine: First Department Affirms Denial of Motion to Dismiss Fraud Claim Involving Artwork
An interesting question sometimes arises in the tort arena in which a third-party to a transaction claims to have been injured by one of the parties. Do the parties to the transaction owe a duty to the third party? The answer depends on whether the third party can show privity or near privity with the alleged tortfeasor. In this regard, the third party must demonstrate that the parties were aware that their report, agreement or transaction documentation would be used by the t
admin
Dec 30, 201912 min read
bottom of page
