Opinion
December 7, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.).
No evidence was submitted that plaintiff or its agents ever made any representation to any defendant, or ever had any sort of advisor relationship or other relationship of trust with any defendant. Nor did defendants raise a triable issue of fact as to whether plaintiff was aware of the potential unsuitability of any defendant as an investor in the failed partnership. Defendants, therefore, have no defense to liability under the indemnification agreements, notwithstanding their allegations of fraudulent inducement to enter into those agreements. Plaintiff had no duty to make any disclosure ( see, Mobil Oil Corp. v Joshi, 202 A.D.2d 318). Defendants have failed to demonstrate that plaintiff aided and abetted a fraud committed by a third party, as they did not provide particularized assertions demonstrating that plaintiff knowingly participated in a breach of duty owing to defendants ( see, Browning Ave. Realty Corp. v Rubin, 207 A.D.2d 263, 267, lv denied 85 N.Y.2d 804), or that plaintiff intentionally furthered any alleged fraud "by providing services that helped in the commission of the fraud." ( Curiale v Peat, Marwick, Mitchell Co., 214 A.D.2d 16, 28.)
We have considered defendants' remaining arguments, and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Asch, JJ.