Schwarz v. Bear Stearns Co.

266 A.D.2d 133, 698 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12349
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 30, 1999·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered August 27, 1998, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court properly dismissed plaintiffs cause of action under General Business Law § 349, since the securities transactions at issue are outside the scope of the statute (see, Smith v Triad Mfg. Group, 255 AD2d 962, 964). In any event, defendants, as clearing brokers, had no duty to disclose to the introducing broker’s clients, and thus the statutory cause of action, as well as the negligence claim, was properly dismissed (see, In re Blech Sec. Litig., 928 F Supp 1279, 1295-1296). Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Williams, Lerner, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

Schwarz v. Bear Stearns Co., 266 A.D.2d 133, 698 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12349 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

266 A.D.2d 133 (Schwarz v. Bear Stearns Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

M & T Bank Corp. v. LaSalle Bank National Ass'n
852 F. Supp. 2d 324 (W.D. New York, 2012)
Gray v. Seaboard Securities, Inc.
14 A.D.3d 852 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Greenfield v. Tassinari
8 A.D.3d 529 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. v. 1109580 Ontario, Inc.
318 F. Supp. 2d 199 (S.D. New York, 2004)
In Re Sterling Foster & Co., Inc., Securities Lit.
222 F. Supp. 2d 216 (E.D. New York, 2002)
Yang v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
282 A.D.2d 271 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)