Opinion
651375/13, 14587, 14586
03-24-2015
Robert SILVERSTEIN, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. IMPERIUM PARTNERS GROUP, LLC, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Creizman PLLC, New York (Eric M. Creizman of counsel), for appellant. Yeskoo Hogan & Tamlyn, LLP, New York (Thomas T. Tamlyn of counsel), for Imperium Partners Group, LLC, Imperium GP, LLC, Imperium Advisers, LLC, Imperium Specialty Finance Fund, L.P., and John C. Michaelson, respondents. Locke Lord LLP, New York (Ira G. Greenberg of counsel), for WeiserMazars LLP, respondent.
Creizman PLLC, New York (Eric M. Creizman of counsel), for appellant.
Yeskoo Hogan & Tamlyn, LLP, New York (Thomas T. Tamlyn of counsel), for Imperium Partners Group, LLC, Imperium GP, LLC, Imperium Advisers, LLC, Imperium Specialty Finance Fund, L.P., and John C. Michaelson, respondents.
Locke Lord LLP, New York (Ira G. Greenberg of counsel), for WeiserMazars LLP, respondent.
Opinion
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Melvin L. Schweitzer, J.), entered January 29, 2014, and November 14, 2013, which granted defendants' respective motions to dismiss the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Plaintiff may not invalidate his release of all claims against defendant Imperium Specialty Finance Fund, L.P. and its “officers, managers, directors, agents and employees” (i.e., defendants the Imperium entities and John Michaelson) on the ground that it was procured by fraud, since the same allegations of fraud were the subject of the release (see Centro Empresarial Cempresa S.A. v. America Movil, S.A.B. de C.V., 17 N.Y.3d 269, 276, 929 N.Y.S.2d 3, 952 N.E.2d 995 [2011] ; Kafa Investments, LLC v. 2170–2178 Broadway LLC, 114 A.D.3d 433, 979 N.Y.S.2d 529 [1st Dept.2014], lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 902, 2014 WL 4454910 [2014] ; Aurateq Systems Intern., Inc. v. David Marvisi, 119 A.D.3d 402, 988 N.Y.S.2d 482 [1st Dept.2014] ).
Plaintiff failed to state claims for aiding and abetting fraud (see Oster v. Kirschner, 77 A.D.3d 51, 55, 905 N.Y.S.2d 69 [1st Dept.2010] ), aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty (see Kaufman v. Cohen, 307 A.D.2d 113, 125, 760 N.Y.S.2d 157 [1st Dept.2003] ), and tortious interference with contract (see Lama Holding Co. v. Smith Barney, 88 N.Y.2d 413, 424, 646 N.Y.S.2d 76, 668 N.E.2d 1370 [1996] ) against WeiserMazars. Finally, plaintiff's allegations failed to support a claim for accountant malpractice.
MAZZARELLI, J.P., FRIEDMAN, SWEENY, GISCHE, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.