See, e.g., Bayerische Landesbank, 692 F.3d at 59–60 (holding that investment manager may be liable to investor in tort for gross negligence); Muller–Paisner v. TIAA, 289 Fed.Appx. 461, 466 (2d Cir.2008) (reversing district court on ground that company offering fixed annuity undertook a relationship of trust and confidence sufficient to plausibly allege a fiduciary relationship and thus plaintiff had stated a tort claim for negligent misrepresentation); Grund v. Delaware Charter Guarantee & Trust Co., 788 F.Supp.2d 226, 247 (S.D.N.Y.2011) (denying motion to dismiss negligence claim under New York law against trustee of retirement accounts where retirement accounts were invested in fund which proved to be a Ponzi scheme), reconsideration granted in part and denied in part on unrelated grounds,2011 WL 3837146 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 30, 2011); A.B. Realty Corp. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 164 F.Supp.2d 296, 304 (D.Conn.2001) (holding MetLife liable in tort for negligent disbursements from annuity contract), aff'd in part, vacated in part,45 Fed.Appx. 34 (2d Cir.2002). Although the duty in such circumstances is generally born of a fiduciary relationship, see, e.g., Murphy, 90 N.Y.2d at 270–72, 660 N.Y.S.2d 371, 682 N.E.2d 972 (noting that fiduciary duties may arise in the insurance context if the requisite trust and confidence is established); Kimmell v. Schaefer, 89 N.Y.2d 257, 263, 652 N.Y.S.2d 715, 675 N.E.2d 450 (1996) (holding that defendants who “possess unique or specialized expertise, or who are in a special position of confidence and trust with the injured party” may be liable for negligent misrepresentations in investment context); Batas, 281 A.D.2d at 264, 724 N.Y.S.2d 3 (recognizing that fiduciary duties may arise in the insurance context where circumstances are appropriate), a fiduciary obligation is not the only obligation that can run between contracting parties.

"A duty extraneous to the contract often exists where the contract accompanies some relation between the parties out of which arises a duty of affirmative care, as in cases involving a bailor and bailee, public carrier and passenger, innkeeper and guest, lawyer and client, or principal and agent." A.B. Realty Corp. v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., No. 3:98Cv01592, 2001 WL 1134612, at *6 (D. Conn. Sept. 7, 2001) (citing Broadway National Bank v. Barton-Russell Corp., 585 N.Y.S.2d 933, 943 (1992).