Rizel v. Bodner

225 A.D.2d 410, 640 N.Y.2d 19, 640 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2717
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 19, 1996·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

[411] Plaintiffs’ allegations, that defendant-appellant knew of the false and misleading representations made by his brother in order to induce plaintiffs to invest in various real estate corporations and that he participated in the diversion of corporate assets for his own use and in furtherance of a fraudulent scheme or plan, to the harm or detriment of plaintiffs, were sufficient to state a cause of action against him for aiding and abetting the alleged fraud (see, CPC Intl. v McKesson Corp., 70 NY2d 268, 285-286; Shearson Lehman Bros. v Bagley, 205 AD2d 467; Franco v English, 210 AD2d 630). The allegations were sufficiently detailed to satisfy the standard of CPLR 3016 (b). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Rubin and Williams, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Rizel v. Bodner, 225 A.D.2d 410, 640 N.Y.2d 19, 640 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2717 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

225 A.D.2d 410 (Rizel v. Bodner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goel v. Ramachandran
111 A.D.3d 783 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
High Tides, LLC v. DeMichele
88 A.D.3d 954 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Goldson v. Walker
65 A.D.3d 1084 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)