Opinion
December 14, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Schackman, J.).
The "rule of promptness" generally applicable to rescission claims does not control this action ( see, Wolf v National City Bank, 170 App. Div. 565, 570). As was discussed in detail in a Federal action brought by different parties similarly situated to plaintiffs herein against the same defendant parties as in this case, an exception to the "rule of promptness" prevails in situations such as this, where plaintiffs would have to return nothing to defendants in the event of rescission (Allen v West Point-Pepperell, 908 F. Supp. 1209, 1218-1220).
We have considered defendants' other arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rosenberger, Wallach, Asch and Tom, JJ.