Opinion
2012-11-14
ROSLYN UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT, respondent, v. Michael BARKAN, et al., appellants, et al., defendants.
Rosenberg Fortuna & Laitman LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Arthur S. Laitman and Anthony T. Wladyka III of counsel), for appellants Michael Barkan and Karen Bodner, Sokoloff Stern LLP, Westbury, N.Y. (Brian S. Sokoloff, Adam I. Kleinberg, and Mark A. Radi of counsel), for appellants William Costigan, Ronna Niederman, Patricia Schissel, and Ellen Siegel, and Hogan & Cassell LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Michael D. Cassell of counsel), for appellant Mary Ann Combs (one brief filed). Farrell Fritz, P.C., Uniondale, N.Y. (James M. Wicks, Aaron E. Zerykier, and Kathryn C. Cole of counsel), for respondent.
Rosenberg Fortuna & Laitman LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Arthur S. Laitman and Anthony T. Wladyka III of counsel), for appellants Michael Barkan and Karen Bodner, Sokoloff Stern LLP, Westbury, N.Y. (Brian S. Sokoloff, Adam I. Kleinberg, and Mark A. Radi of counsel), for appellants William Costigan, Ronna Niederman, Patricia Schissel, and Ellen Siegel, and Hogan & Cassell LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Michael D. Cassell of counsel), for appellant Mary Ann Combs (one brief filed). Farrell Fritz, P.C., Uniondale, N.Y. (James M. Wicks, Aaron E. Zerykier, and Kathryn C. Cole of counsel), for respondent.
, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, and CHERYL E. CHAMBERS, JJ.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence, the defendants Michael Barkan, Karen Bodner, William Costigan, Mary Ann Combs Ronna Niederman, Ellen Siegel, and Patricia Schissel appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Cozzens, Jr., J.), entered July 5, 2011, which denied their respective motions, inter alia, to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(3) and (7).
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
“On a motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) for failure to state a cause of action, the court must afford the pleading a liberal construction, accept all facts as alleged in the pleading to be true, accord the plaintiff the benefit of every possible inference, and determine only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory” ( Breytman v. Olinville Realty, LLC, 54 A.D.3d 703, 703–704, 864 N.Y.S.2d 70;see EBC I, Inc. v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., 5 N.Y.3d 11, 19, 799 N.Y.S.2d 170, 832 N.E.2d 26;Leon v. Martinez, 84 N.Y.2d 83, 87, 614 N.Y.S.2d 972, 638 N.E.2d 511;White Plains Cleaning Servs., Inc. v. 901 Props., LLC, 94 A.D.3d 1108, 1108–1109, 942 N.Y.S.2d 636; East Hampton Union Free Scho.ol Dist. v. Sandpebble Bldrs., Inc., 66 A.D.3d 122, 125, 884 N.Y.S.2d 94,affd.16 N.Y.3d 775, 919 N.Y.S.2d 496, 944 N.E.2d 1135). Here, the complaint adequately alleges causes of action to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence.
We reject the appellants' contention that, in the absence of specific enabling legislation, a school district may not commence an action against current or former members of its board of education. As the Court of Appeals held in a prior appeal in this action ( Roslyn Union Free School Dist. v. Barkan, 16 N.Y.3d 643, 649, 926 N.Y.S.2d 349, 950 N.E.2d 85), the plaintiff here is a “corporation.” A corporation has the right to sue and be sued (N.Y. Const., art. X, § 4; Andraka v. Town of Pompey, 1 A.D.2d 427, 431, 151 N.Y.S.2d 905). By virtue of that right, it has the right to prosecute an action “for injury and damages sustained by it by reason of mismanagement or misconduct in its affairs, waste of assets, or derelictions in duty by the directors, officers, agents or employees of the corporation” ( Platt Corp. v. Platt, 21 A.D.2d 116, 120, 249 N.Y.S.2d 75,affd.15 N.Y.2d 705, 256 N.Y.S.2d 335, 204 N.E.2d 495;see Amfesco Indus. v. Greenblatt, 172 A.D.2d 261, 264, 568 N.Y.S.2d 593).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.