Fraud Claim Untimely Because Plaintiff Failed to Sue Within Two Years of Being on Inquiry Notice of the Fraud

Fraud Claim Untimely Because Plaintiff Failed to Sue Within Two Years of Being on Inquiry Notice of the Fraud

On January 29, 2026, the First Department issued a decision in Milne Travel Agency, Inc. v. Altour Del., LLC, 2026 NY Slip Op. 00426, holding that a fraud claim was untimely because the plaintiff failed to sue within two years of being on inquiry notice of the fraud . . . Continue reading Fraud Claim Untimely Because Plaintiff Failed to Sue Within Two Years of Being on Inquiry Notice of the Fraud

Fraud Counterclaim Based on Misrepresentation of Financial Condition Dismissed For Lack of Reasonable Reliance Because Plaintiff’s Finances Were Disclosed to Public

Fraud Counterclaim Based on Misrepresentation of Financial Condition Dismissed For Lack of Reasonable Reliance Because Plaintiff’s Finances Were Disclosed to Public

On November 28, 2025, Justice Cohen of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Google LLC v. Dr Globaltech, Inc., 2025 NY Slip Op. 34627(U), dismissing a fraud counterclaim based the plaintiff’s alleged misrepresentation of its financial condition for lack of reasonable reliance because the plaintiff’s finances were disclosed to the public . . . Continue reading Fraud Counterclaim Based on Misrepresentation of Financial Condition Dismissed For Lack of Reasonable Reliance Because Plaintiff’s Finances Were Disclosed to Public

Fraud Claim Survives Dismissal for Lack of Due Diligence Because of Application of the Special Facts Doctrine

Fraud Claim Survives Dismissal for Lack of Due Diligence Because of Application of the Special Facts Doctrine

On September 26, 2025, Justice Patel of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Leinhardt v. Socure, Inc., 2025 NY Slip Op. 33670(U), holding that a fraud claim survived dismissal for lack of due diligence because of the application of the special facts doctrine . . . Continue reading Fraud Claim Survives Dismissal for Lack of Due Diligence Because of Application of the Special Facts Doctrine