Haber To establish a cause of action for fraud, a plaintiff must plead a material misrepresentation of Division, First Department addressed the falsity and reliance elements of a fraudulent inducement cause of action Partners, LLC Pope Investments arose from a “Chinese reverse merger,” a complicated transaction enabling American In April 2014, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, asserting nine causes of action against defendant In response to defendants’ motion to dismiss, plaintiffs withdrew several causes of action.

Trust Co., an action that involves numerous areas of the law about which we frequently write -- mortgage FAPA The Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (“FAPA”), which went into effect in December of 2022, “represents (the “First Foreclosure Action”). March 2021 (the “Second Foreclosure Action”). commenced a new foreclosure action within the applicable limitations period.

(“DCC”), the general contractor for the Project and a non-party to the action. Defendant, Maria Lehman, moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the tort causes of action alleged against her were time-barred, and that they failed to state a cause of action. of action. concealment.[12] The mere silence of the seller, without some act or conduct which deceived the purchaser

governed by Article 5 of the CPLR , is initially chosen by the plaintiff at the commencement of the action pursuant to CPLR 510(3) , which provides that “ he court, upon motion, may change the place of trial of an action Nir , an action based on a sexual assault and brought under the Adult Survivors Act (CPLR 214-j) , was

It shall be unlawful for any person to act as a debt collection agency without first having obtained defenses in borrowers’ answer, was that Lender “failed to allege that it had obtained a license to act Thus, a mortgage foreclosure action “is not an action to recover the mortgage debt from the mortgagor Since the Lender held the note, it was acting on its own behalf and not on behalf of “another.” interpretation of the United States Supreme Court of provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

content of the defendant’s false representations, as well as the details of the defendant’s fraudulent acts , including when the acts occurred, who engaged in them, and what was obtained as a result. On November 10, 2017, plaintiff commenced the action in Supreme Court. Among other things, defendant argued that the allegations in the amended complaint concerned acts that The motion court also held that plaintiff failed to state a fraud cause of action.

second category involves non-monetary relief, where the party against whom the class seeks relief “has acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the class” so that injunctive or declaratory relief A class action is often the only way average Americans with limited means can remedy wrongs committed Class action lawsuits have a deterrent effect on bad actors.  Americans the ability to recover damages for their injuries and losses.

shareholders, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC” or “Commission”) has brought enforcement actions , or settled potential enforcement actions, when corporations and their officers and directors issue The SEC brought and settled such an action against VMware Inc., Palo Alto, California-based technology The SEC’s order found that VMware violated the antifraud provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, as

As noted in prior BLOG articles, in New York, “a valid release constitutes a complete bar to an action If “the language of a release is clear and unambiguous, the signing of a release is a ‘jural act’ binding See also Centro Empresarial Cempresa S.A. v AmÉrica MÓvil, S.A.B. de C.V. , 17 N.Y.3d 269, 276 (2011) Arch and other entities, including brokers, but simultaneously provided that the release was only from actions Furthermore, although the releases indicated that they applied to actions sounding in "contract, quasi-contract

may be commenced after ninety days if no action is taken to resolve the matter.  Bank of America, N.A. v. Wheatly , 158 A.D.3d 736 (2 nd Dep’t 2018) (citations omitted). Lender commenced the subject foreclosure action in 2015.  Borrowers cross-moved for summary judgment dismissing the action as time-barred.  However, the limited power of attorney authorizing Ocwen Financial to act on behalf of the plaintiff,

According to the SEC, Pearson violated Sections 17(a)(2) and 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act of 1934 and Rules 12b-20, 13a-15(a), and 13a-16 thereunder.

of the operating agreement, plaintiffs alleged that defendant Joel Spitzer (“Spitzer”) had (a) been acting Plaintiffs sought an injunction preventing Spitzer from acting as the owner of the property and from Triboro had acted as managing agent of the property and claimed that money was owed. acted improperly.” be adversely affected by a judgment in the action.