Plaintiff Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Contract Claim When There Was a Question of Fact Regarding Damages
Commercial Case Notes / Contracts

Plaintiff Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Contract Claim When There Was a Question of Fact Regarding Damages

On July 19, 2023, the Second Department issued a decision in FPG CH 94 Amity, LLC v. Pizzarotti, LLC, 2023 NY Slip Op. 03852, holding that a plaintiff was not entitled to summary judgment on a breach of contract claim because there were questions of fact regarding damages . . . Continue reading Plaintiff Not Entitled to Summary Judgment on Contract Claim When There Was a Question of Fact Regarding Damages

Fraudulent Inducement Claim Based on Statements of Present Fact Not Duplicative of Contract Claim
Commercial Case Notes / Contracts / Fraud/Misrepresentation

Fraudulent Inducement Claim Based on Statements of Present Fact Not Duplicative of Contract Claim

On June 29, 2023, Justice Chan of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Emigrant Bus. Credit Corp. v. Hanratty, 2023 NY Slip Op. 32156(U), holding that a fraudulent inducement claim based on statements of present fact was not duplicative of a breach of contract claim . . . Continue reading Fraudulent Inducement Claim Based on Statements of Present Fact Not Duplicative of Contract Claim

Claim for Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Can Exist Even When a Contract Term Has Not Been Breached
Commercial Case Notes / Contracts

Claim for Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Can Exist Even When a Contract Term Has Not Been Breached

On June 15, 2023, the First Department issued a decision in Barnett v. Berkowitz, 2023 NY Slip Op. 03286, holding that a claim for breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing can exist when the defendant has not breached a term of a contract . . . Continue reading Claim for Breach of the Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Can Exist Even When a Contract Term Has Not Been Breached

Even Though Defendant Did Not Have a Fiduciary Duty to the Plaintiff, it Had a Sufficiently Close Relationship That it Could be Liable for Negligence
Commercial Case Notes / Contracts / Fiduciaries

Even Though Defendant Did Not Have a Fiduciary Duty to the Plaintiff, it Had a Sufficiently Close Relationship That it Could be Liable for Negligence

On May 30, 2023, the First Department issued a decision in ERA Capital L.P. v. Soleil Chartered Bank, 2023 NY Slip Op. 02845, holding that even though the defendant did not have a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff, it had a sufficiently close relationship that it could be held liable for negligence . . . Continue reading Even Though Defendant Did Not Have a Fiduciary Duty to the Plaintiff, it Had a Sufficiently Close Relationship That it Could be Liable for Negligence