SRG Partners v. Asch

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

SRG Partners v. Asch

270 A.D.2d 4, 703 N.Y.S.2d 722, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2264

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 2, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 4 (SRG Partners v. Asch) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

SRG Partners v. Asch, 270 A.D.2d 4, 703 N.Y.S.2d 722, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2264 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered August 30, 1999, after a nonjury trial, dismissing the complaint as against defendants-respondents, and judgment, same court and Justice, entered thereon on September 21, 1999, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants-respondents’ statements concerning predictions [5]*5of future events cannot form the basis for a fraud cause of action (see, Beltrone v General Schuyler & Co., 223 AD2d 938, 941). In any event, the record supports the court’s determination that plaintiff failed to prove, by clear and convincing evidence (see, Abrahami v UPC Constr. Co., 224 AD2d 231, 234), the elements of its fraud claims against defendants-respondents (see, Lama Holding Co. v Smith Barney, 88 NY2d 413, 421). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered August 30, 1999, after a nonjury trial, dismissing the complaint as against defendants-respondents, and judgment, same court and Justice, entered thereon on September 21, 1999, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendants-respondents’ statements concerning predictions [5]*5of future events cannot form the basis for a fraud cause of action (see, Beltrone v General Schuyler & Co., 223 AD2d 938, 941). In any event, the record supports the court’s determination that plaintiff failed to prove, by clear and convincing evidence (see, Abrahami v UPC Constr. Co., 224 AD2d 231, 234), the elements of its fraud claims against defendants-respondents (see, Lama Holding Co. v Smith Barney, 88 NY2d 413, 421). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Rosenberger, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 4, 703 N.Y.S.2d 722, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/srg-partners-v-asch-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack