From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Carl v. Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 30, 2008
55 A.D.3d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Summary

affirming dismissal of fraud claim as duplicative since claim failed to allege damages "separate and distinct" from malpractice claim

Summary of this case from Aaron v. Deloitte Tax LLP

Opinion

October 30, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Robinson Edmead, J.), entered Jun e 18, 2007, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiffs claims for tortious interference with prospective business advantage and fraud, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Williams, Buckley and Renwick, JJ.


The fraud claim was duplicative of the legal malpractice claim since it was "not based on an allegation of independent, intentionally tortious" conduct ( Sabo v Alan B. Brill, P.C., 25 AD3d 420, 421) and failed to allege "separate and distinct" damages ( White of Lake George v Bell, 251 AD2d 777, 778, lv dismissed 92 NY2d 947). The court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying leave to replead the fraud claim because the purportedly new evidence was insufficient to allege independent conduct not already included in the legal malpractice claim.

The tortious interference claim was insufficient because it failed to allege that defendant had directed his fraudulent conduct at a specific third party, that said party would have hired plaintiff but for defendant's misconduct, and that defendant's wrongful conduct was motivated solely by an intent to injure plaintiff ( see Carvel Corp. v Noonan, 3 NY3d 182).

[ See 2007 NY Slip Op 31665(U).]


Summaries of

Carl v. Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 30, 2008
55 A.D.3d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

affirming dismissal of fraud claim as duplicative since claim failed to allege damages "separate and distinct" from malpractice claim

Summary of this case from Aaron v. Deloitte Tax LLP

In Carl v. Cohen, 55 A.D.3d 478, 868 N.Y.S.2d 7 (1st Dept.2008), on which defendants rely, the plaintiff sought to elevate the defendant's failure to reveal an ethical conflict of interest from a malpractice claim into a fraud claim.

Summary of this case from Johnson v. Proskauer Rose LLP

deeming fraud claim duplicative of legal malpractice claim where it "was not based on an allegation of independent, intentionally tortious conduct and failed to allege separate and distinct damages"

Summary of this case from Hahn v. Dewey & LeBoeuf Liquidation Trust
Case details for

Carl v. Cohen

Case Details

Full title:JOHN R. CARL, Appellant, v. JOEL COHEN, ESQ., Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Oct 30, 2008

Citations

55 A.D.3d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
868 N.Y.S.2d 7

Citing Cases

Aaron v. Deloitte Tax LLP

There is no "allegation of independent, intentionally tortious conduct" to sustain the fraud claim. See Carl…

Worldview Entm't Holdings Inc. v. Woodrow

This rule applies as well to claims of aiding and abetting fraud and aiding and abetting fiduciary duty when…