Merely providing a notice of indemnification pursuant to the Agreement does not necessarily suffice to assert a claim for breach of MSR's obligation to indemnify.See, e.g., Maspeth Federal Savings & Loan Association v. Fidelity Information Servs., LLC, 275 F.Supp. 3D 411, 414, 418 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (dismissing contractual indemnification claim because, even though plaintiff provided written notice of a claim and demand for indemnification, the claimed losses fell outside the scope of the parties' agreements); Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 491, 149 N.Y.S.3d 16, 17-18 (1st Dep't 2021) (affirming dismissal of claim for indemnification even though “Nationstar sent Ocwen a $15 million general demand for indemnification, with an attachment of over 500 pages of spreadsheets purporting to list all losses suffered by Nationstar under the purchase agreement”).

Here, even assuming Nationstar properly complied with the notice of indemnification requirements in the Agreement, such notice does not necessarily suffice to assert a claim for breach of MSR's obligation to indemnify. See, e.g, Maspeth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass 'n v. Fid. Info. Servs., LLC, 275 F.Supp.3d 411, 414, 418 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (dismissing contractual indemnification claim because, even though plaintiff provided written notice of a claim and demand for indemnification, the claimed losses fell outside the scope of the parties' agreements); Nationstar Mortg., LLC v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 491 (App. Div. 1st Dep't 2021) (affirming dismissal of claim for indemnification even though “Nationstar sent Ocwen a $15 million general demand for indemnification, with an attachment of over 500 pages of spreadsheets purporting to list all losses suffered by Nationstar under the purchase Agreement”).

The complaint also sufficiently alleges aiding and abetting fraud, asserted against defendant in the alternative, as it alleges that defendant made false representations to Tahari, thus assisting the fraud and proximately causing the harm on which the primary liability is predicated (seeStanfield Offshore Leveraged Assets, Ltd. v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 64 A.D.3d 472, 476, 883 N.Y.S.2d 486 [1st Dept. 2009], lv denied 13 N.Y.3d 709, 2009 WL 3379028 [2009] ). However, the cause of action seeking a declaratory judgment should have been dismissed as duplicative (seeNationstar Mtge., LLC v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 493, 149 N.Y.S.3d 16 [1st Dept. 2021] ). The claim is substantially similar to the one for breach of contract, as it seeks a declaration of the same rights and obligations as those arising from the 2005 loan and the 2007 written loan agreement (seeColfin SNP–1 Funding, LLC v. Security Natl. Props. Servicing Co., LLC, 199 A.D.3d 406, 407, 153 N.Y.S.3d 863 [1st Dept. 2021] ). We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Plaintiff's declaratory judgment claim is duplicative of the breach of contract and reformation claims, which can afford full relief, and thus was properly dismissed (see Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 493 [1st Dept 2021]).

Pursuant to CPLR 3013, "'a complaint must allege facts that are sufficiently particular to give the court and the defendants proper notice of the "transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions [and] occurrences' intended to be proved" (Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Ocwen Loan Servicing. LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 492 [1st Dept 2021] [citation omitted]; CPLR 3013). Under CPLR 3014, a "pleading shall consist of plain and concise statements in consecutively numbered paragraphs ... separately stated and numbered" (Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v Merchants Mut. Ins. Co., 84 A.D.2d 736, 736 [1st Dept 1981]).

The complaint also sufficiently alleges aiding and abetting fraud, asserted against defendant in the alternative, as it alleges that defendant made false representations to Tahari, thus assisting the fraud and proximately causing the harm on which the primary liability is predicated (see Stanfield Offshore Leveraged Assets, Ltd. v Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 64 A.D.3d 472, 476 [1st Dept 2009], Iv denied 13 N.Y.3d 709 [2009]). However, the cause of action seeking a declaratory judgment should have been dismissed as duplicative (see Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 493 [1st Dept 2021]). The claim is substantially similar to the one for breach of contract, as it seeks a declaration of the same rights and obligations as those arising from the 2005 loan and the 2007 written loan agreement (see Colfin SNP-1 Funding, LLC v Security Natl. Props. Servicing Co., LLC, 199 A.D.3d 406, 407 [1st Dept 2021]).

Barons' declaratory judgment claim is dismissed because Barons has not identified a "justiciable controversy" as required by CPLR 3001. Instead, the declarations sought are duplicative of the aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty claim in this action and the discovery issues in the Special Proceeding (Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 493 [1st Dept 2021]). Whether Shapiro earned fees, made, or withheld payments, misused Barons' confidential information, or mischaracterized revenues are facts that will be decided in connection with the aiding and abetting claim (Upfront Megatainment, Inc. v Thiam, 215 A.D.3d 576, 578 [1st Dept 2023]).

That is, resolution of the breach of contract claims would necessarily require a determination of whether DDC abided by the terms of the contract and provide full relief. See Upfront Megatainment, Inc. v Thiam, 215 A.D.3d 576 (1st Dept. 2023); Moghtaderi v Apis Capital Advisors, 205 A.D.3d 504 (1st Dept. 2022); Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v Ocwen Loan Svcg, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490 (1st Dept. 2021); Wildenstein, v 5H &Co., Inc., 97 A.D.3d 488 (1st Dept. 2012).

Here, DIRECTV'S second cause of action and Nexstar's first counterclaim, both for breach of contract, offer adequate, alternative remedies to a declaratory judgment. (See Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 493 [1st Dept 2021].) Accordingly, the part of DIRECTV'S motion for summary judgment on DIRECTV'S fourth cause of action and for summary judgment dismissing

Likewise, plaintiff's claim for a declaratory judgment merely duplicates his claim that defendants breached the Operating Agreement. Moghtaderi v. Apis Cap. Advisors, 205 A.D.3d 504, 506 (1st Dep't 2022); Nationstar Mtge., LLC v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 194 A.D.3d 490, 493 (1st Dep't 2021) .