Search Results

That’s illegal, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently announced fraud charges against alleged perpetrators of just such a scheme:” a long-running international securities fraud scheme in “The SEC is committed to rooting out fraudulent attacks on our financial markets by bad actors in the “The FBI and our partners take securities fraud very seriously and we will do everything we can to hold researching investment opportunities and to contact us immediately if they become a victim of financial fraud

According to the Alert, people looking to perpetrate a fraud on unsuspecting investors are, among other Here, the fraudster impersonates an actual person. The OIEA says that investors should be skeptical and refrain from turning over one’s money if fraud is As noted by the OIEA, such promises are “classic sign of fraud.” Such offers, which are typically made through cold calls, are also a tell-tale sign of fraud. 

that falls within the scope of a release when he/she can demonstrate that the release was procured by fraud Where a party “releases a fraud claim”, he/she “may later challenge that release as fraudulently induced only if can identify a separate fraud from the subject of the release.” Therefore, in the absence of duress, illegality, fraud, or mutual mistake, a release will not be set

New York Court of Appeals has acknowledged the application of absolute guaranties even to claims of fraudulent Among their defenses to the litigation, the defendants asserted fraud in the inducement, based on alleged absolute and unconditional” language of the guaranty, the defendants were foreclosed from asserting their fraud the defendants to assert that the bank induced them to sign “would in effect condone defendants’ own fraud

summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the suit was barred by the Statute of Frauds The motion court denied the motion holding that the Statute of Frauds did not apply to render void oral Defendants also reiterated their previous (and alternative) legal argument that the Statute of Frauds

This Blog frequently highlights cases analyzing the viability of fraud claims when contract claims are sounding in breach of contract (first), negligent construction (second), breach of warranty (third), fraud The Michael Davis Court also affirmed the dismissal of the fraud in the inducement counterclaim because “the allegations which form the basis of the counterclaim alleging fraud in the inducement are the same The defendant's allegation that the plaintiff fraudulently represented that it would install all soundproofing

According to the SEC, “the whistleblower promptly alerted SEC staff to an ongoing fraud and provided assistance to SEC staff by meeting in person and helping the staff understand the mechanics of the fraudulent the award: “Today’s whistleblower provided significant information that alerted SEC staff to ongoing fraud

Nordlicht and other members of Management were indicted for fraud, and the SEC sued Management, Nordlicht plaintiff must provide sufficient facts to support a “reasonable inference” that the allegations of fraud Thus, where the facts “are peculiarly within the knowledge of the party charged with the fraud,” and or could with reasonable diligence have discovered the fraud. Finally, the Court held that “the fraud claim essential to the breach of fiduciary duty claim,” and,

The Faison Court, explaining the difference between void and voidable deeds procured by fraud, stated reflects the assent of the will to the use of the paper or the transfer, although it is assent induced by fraud Mentore answered and asserted a fraud counterclaim.  that the 2009 Mortgage and deed were void and should be extinguished because they were precured by fraud However, because it determined that plaintiff did not perpetrate fraud in acquiring the mortgage, supreme

Notably, the deceptive practice does not have to rise to “the level of common-law fraud to be actionable In fact, “ lthough General Business Law § 349 claims have been aptly characterized as similar to fraud For example, while reliance is an element of a fraud claim, it is not an element of a GBL § 349 claim While the statute covers deceptive and fraudulent acts, as discussed herein, claims under GBL § 349

Recently, the issue arose in connection with an action alleging, among other things, fraud and negligent transferring tort claims to Royal Park: It is well settled in New York, that the right to assert a fraud There must be some language that evinces an intent to transfer fraud claims. *** Here, it is undisputed Takeaway Two lessons flow from Royal Park : 1) the right to assert a fraud claim related to a contract There must be some language that evinces an intent to transfer fraud claims; and 2) where the assignment

action by which a party seeks to alter the terms of a written contract based on “mutual mistake or fraud As the Chimart Court stated: In the proper circumstances, mutual mistake or fraud may furnish the basis agreement and, unknown to either, the signed writing does not express that agreement  In a case of fraud reformation was necessary “because an action at law afforded no real relief against an instrument secured by fraud another way, the party seeking reformation “has to show in no uncertain terms, not only that mistake or fraud