From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Handel v. Bruder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 17, 1994
209 A.D.2d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

November 17, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Myriam J. Altman, J.).


Plaintiff's complaint was insufficient to set forth a prima facie fraud claim because it failed to set forth specific and detailed factual allegations that the defendant personally participated in, or had knowledge of any alleged fraud (CPLR 3016 [b]; see, Residential Bd. of Mgrs. v. Union Sq.-14th St. Assocs., 190 A.D.2d 636, 637-638). The defendant cannot be held personally liable for statements in the offering memo about the status of construction, the likelihood of success of the project and the business plan of the partnership absent personal knowledge that such statements were untrue when made (see, Derwald v. L.J.N. Toys, 161 A.D.2d 223), and his predictions are not actionable absent evidence that they were made with the intent to deceive (Sanyo Elec. v. Pinros Gar Corp., 174 A.D.2d 452, 453).

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Handel v. Bruder

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 17, 1994
209 A.D.2d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Handel v. Bruder

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE HANDEL et al., Respondents, v. RONALD BRUDER, Appellant, et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 17, 1994

Citations

209 A.D.2d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
618 N.Y.S.2d 356

Citing Cases

Friedman v. Anderson

"[A] mere recitation of the elements of fraud is insufficient to state a cause of action" ( National Union…

Weisberger v. Rubinstein

"A mere recitation of the elements of fraud is insufficient to state a cause of action" ( National Union…