IDT Corp. v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co.

Plaintiff is unable to allege that it reasonably relied on defendants’ misrepresentation that they would stop disparaging it in discussions with Telefonica. In a prior appeal, the Court of Appeals rejected plaintiffs argument that defendants’ statute of limitations affirmative defenses should be barred by equitable estoppel, because after learning of defendants’ disparagement of it, plaintiff was on inquiry notice that it might have legal claims against them and therefore “should have made further inquiry before the statute of limitations expired” (see 12 NY3d 132, 141 [2009]). Contrary to…