On August 6, 2025, the Second Department issued a decision in Benjamin v. Kahen, 2025 NY Slip Op. 04538, holding that an action was barred by an unambiguous release, explaining:
Generally, a valid release constitutes a complete bar to an action on a claim which is the subject of the release. A release may encompass unknown claims, including unknown fraud claims, if the parties so intend and the agreement is fairly and knowingly made. A party may move for judgment dismissing one or more causes of action asserted against the party on the ground that the cause of action may not be maintained because of a release. In resolving a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5), the plaintiff’s allegations are to be treated as true, and all inferences that reasonably flow therefrom are to be resolved in his or her favor. Although the defendant has the initial burden of establishing that it has been released from any claims, a signed release shifts the burden to the plaintiff to show that there has been fraud, duress or some other fact which will be sufficient to void the release.
Here, in support of that branch of their motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the amended complaint, the defendants submitted, inter alia, the release executed by the plaintiff, which, by its plain terms, barred this action against the defendants. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to show that there was fraud, duress, or some other circumstance that would be sufficient to void the release. A party is under an obligation to read a document before he or she signs it, and a party cannot generally avoid the effect of a document on the ground that he or she did not read it or know its contents. Accordingly, upon reargument, the Supreme Court should have granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the amended complaint.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).