Van Neil v. Berger

219 A.D.2d 811, 632 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10832
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 29, 1995·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Order insofar as appealed from unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted in part and third cause of action dismissed. Memorandum: A cause of action for fraud or misrepresentation must state in detail the circumstances constituting the wrong (CPLR 3016 [b]). A cause of action for fraud is not stated where the only fraud alleged relates to a breach of contract (Sparka Travel v Hamza, 182 AD2d 1067,1067-1068). Because plaintiff s third cause of action neither alleges a breach of a duty distinct from the contractual duty between the parties, nor states specific claims of fraud or misrepresentation, Supreme Court should have dismissed it (see, Edwil Indus. v Stroba Instruments Corp., 131 AD2d 425). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Rosenbloom, J. — Dismiss Cause of Action.) Present — Denman, P. J., Fallon, Wesley, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

Van Neil v. Berger, 219 A.D.2d 811, 632 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10832 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

219 A.D.2d 811 (Van Neil v. Berger) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barkley v. United Property Group, LLC
557 F. App'x 22 (Second Circuit, 2014)
GEM Advisors, Inc. v. Corporación Sidenor, S.A.
667 F. Supp. 2d 308 (S.D. New York, 2009)
Papa's-June Music, Inc. v. McLean
921 F. Supp. 1154 (S.D. New York, 1996)