Sulaiman Corp. v. Asian American Food Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sulaiman Corp. v. Asian American Food Corp.

285 A.D.2d 499, 727 N.Y.S.2d 652, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7095

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

DecidedJuly 9, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 285 A.D.2d 499 (Sulaiman Corp. v. Asian American Food Corp.) 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

Sulaiman Corp. v. Asian American Food Corp., 285 A.D.2d 499, 727 N.Y.S.2d 652, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7095 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to [500]*500rescind the purchase of a business based on fraudulent inducement, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCaffrey, J.), dated August 22, 2000, as granted the motion of the defendants Asian American Food Corp. and Anil Bhantia pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7) to dismiss the plaintiffs’ first cause of action alleging fraudulent inducement.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The statements in the plaintiffs complaint and the parties’ contract negate the plaintiffs’ claim that they reasonably relied upon the alleged oral misrepresentations of the defendant Anil Bhantia (see, Stone v Schulz, 231 AD2d 707). Accordingly, they failed to state a cause of action sounding in fraudulent inducement (see, Stone v Schulz, supra). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to [500]*500rescind the purchase of a business based on fraudulent inducement, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCaffrey, J.), dated August 22, 2000, as granted the motion of the defendants Asian American Food Corp. and Anil Bhantia pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7) to dismiss the plaintiffs’ first cause of action alleging fraudulent inducement.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The statements in the plaintiffs complaint and the parties’ contract negate the plaintiffs’ claim that they reasonably relied upon the alleged oral misrepresentations of the defendant Anil Bhantia (see, Stone v Schulz, 231 AD2d 707). Accordingly, they failed to state a cause of action sounding in fraudulent inducement (see, Stone v Schulz, supra). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D.2d 499, 727 N.Y.S.2d 652, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sulaiman-corp-v-asian-american-food-corp-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack