Legal Opinion

Gordon v. Curtis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided December 15, 2009PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*550Plaintiffs fraud cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations. Plaintiffs claim that they did not discover the alleged fraud until late 2006 or early 2007 and could not with reasonable diligence have discovered it sooner (see CPLR 213 [8]). However, only a few months after their application to purchase a cooperative apartment was rejected, in 1998, plaintiffs were approved for the purchase of another apartment in the building. Although this sequence of events should fairly have aroused their suspicion, plaintiffs, who as shareholders in the cooperative were in a position to try to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Higgins v. . CrouseNew York Court of Appeals · 1895
  2. State Tax Commission v. ShorNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. 767 Third Avenue LLC v. Greble & Finger, LLPAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  4. Lisa Marie v. AltshulerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  5. Solow Management Corp. v. Arista Records, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Devices Liquidation Trust v. Pinebridge Vantage Partners (In re Personal Communication Devices, LLC)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API