Blogs

Posts Categorized: Fraud/Misrepresentation

Posted: December 13, 2017

Fraud Claim Should Not Have Been Dismissed as Time-Barred; Question of Fact Existed Regarding When Fraud Should Have Been Discovered

On December 5, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Berman v. Holland & Knight, LLP, 2017 NY Slip Op. 08489, holding that a fraud claim against a law firm should not have been dismissed because there was a question of fact regarding when the fraud should have been discovered, explaining: The two-year discovery... Read more »

Posted: November 20, 2017

Fraud Claim Time-Barred; Plaintiffs Failed Timely to Take Action After They Had Inquiry Notice of Claim

On November 14, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Moses v. Dunlop, 2017 NY Slip Op. 07962, holding that a fraud claim was time-barred because of the plaintiffs’ failure timely to bring suit after they had inquiry notice of their claim, explaining: The fraud claims, to the extent they arise from conduct that... Read more »

Posted: October 29, 2017

Fraud Plaintiff Was Unreasonable in Relying on Representation Contradicted by Term Sheet

On October 13, 2017, Justice Masley of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in City’s 5th Ave. 54th St. LLC v. 685 Fifth Ave. Owner LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op. 32197(U), dismissing a fraud claim because the plaintiff’s reliance on an oral representation that was contradicted by the parties’ term sheet was... Read more »

Posted: September 29, 2017

Fraudulent Inducement Claims Dismissed on Summary Judgment: No Reasonable Reliance

On September 15, 2017, Justice Sherwood of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in SFR Holdings Ltd. v. Rice, 2017 NY Slip Op. 31974(U), dismissing a fraudulent inducement claim on summary judgment for lack of reasonable reliance, explaining: To prove fraudulent inducement to contract, a plaintiff must demonstrate the misrepresentation of a... Read more »

Posted: September 21, 2017

Fraud Claim Based on Promise to Perform Under the Parties’ Contract Dismissed

In September 19, 2017, a divided First Department issued a decision in Cronos Group Ltd. v. XComIP, LLC, 2017 NY Slip Op. 06515, reversing a decision by Justice Ostrager of the New York County Commercial Division and dismissing a fraud claim founded upon an allegation that the defendant made promises with an undisclosed present intention... Read more »

Posted: September 3, 2017

Fraud Claim Cannot be Based on Statement Contradicted by Unambiguous Term of Contract

On August 25, 2017, Justice Kornreich of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in MPEG LA, L.L.C. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 2017 NY Slip Op. 31799(U), dismissing a fraud claim based on a misrepresentation that contradicted an unambiguous term of the parties’ contract, explaining: Samsung’s fraudulent inducement claim is based on... Read more »

Posted: August 13, 2017

Two-Year Discovery Rule Does Not Save Fraud Claim from Being Time-Barred

On August 7, 2017, Justice Kornreich of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Epiphany Community Nursery School v. Levey, 2017 NY Slip Op. 31668(U), holding that the two-year discovery rule did not save a fraud claim from being time-barred, explaining: [A]ll of the claims in the complaint are dismissed as time-barred.... Read more »

Posted: August 8, 2017

Merger Clause Bars Fraud Claim

On July 31, 2017, Justice Sherwood of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Representaciones E Investigaciones Medicas, S.A. De C.V. v. Abdala, 2017 NY Slip Op. 31619(U), dismissing a fraud claim relating to the acquisition of a pharmaceutical company based on a contract’s merger clause. In Representaciones E Investigaciones Medicas, the... Read more »

Posted: June 7, 2017

Fraud Claim Dismissed as Time-Barred; Plaintiffs Were on Inquiry Notice

On June 1, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in MBI International Holdings Inc. v. Barclays Bank PLC, 2017 NY Slip Op. 04381, affirming the dismissal of a fraud claim as time-barred because the plaintiffs were on inquiry notice of their claim more than two years before they brought suit, explaining: An action in... Read more »