Valger v. Konigsberg Wolf & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Valger v. Konigsberg Wolf & Co.

301 A.D.2d 517, 753 N.Y.S.2d 386

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 301 A.D.2d 517 (Valger v. Konigsberg Wolf & Co.) 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

Valger v. Konigsberg Wolf & Co., 301 A.D.2d 517, 753 N.Y.S.2d 386 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud and professional malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gammer, J.), dated December 21, 2001, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to dismiss their claims alleging fraud and professional malpractice.

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

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims alleging fraud and professional malpractice for failure to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]; 3016 [b]; Cohen v Houseconnect Realty Corp., 289 AD2d 277; Georgetown Mews Owners’ Corp. v Campus Assoc., 289 AD2d 376). Feuerstein, J.P., Smith, O’Brien and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud and professional malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gammer, J.), dated December 21, 2001, as granted those branches of the defendant’s motion which were to dismiss their claims alleging fraud and professional malpractice.

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

The Supreme Court properly dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims alleging fraud and professional malpractice for failure to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]; 3016 [b]; Cohen v Houseconnect Realty Corp., 289 AD2d 277; Georgetown Mews Owners’ Corp. v Campus Assoc., 289 AD2d 376). Feuerstein, J.P., Smith, O’Brien and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 517, 753 N.Y.S.2d 386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valger-v-konigsberg-wolf-co-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack