Segal v. Cooper
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Accepting as true the facts as alleged in the complaint, according plaintiff the benefit of every favorable inference, and determining only whether the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory (Sokoloff v Harriman Estates Dev. Corp., 96 NY2d 409, 414 [2001]), we find that plaintiffs causes of action were adequately alleged. As to fraud, whether plaintiffs reliance upon defendants’ alleged misrepresentations was reasonable is a factual issue not to be resolved on a motion directed at the pleadings (see generally Brunetti v Musallam, 11 AD3d 280 [2004]). The adequacy of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Sokoloff v. Harriman Estates Development Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2001
- Marx v. AkersNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Wiener v. Lazard Freres & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Cohn v. Lionel Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Giblin v. MurphyNew York Court of Appeals · 1988
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Jones v. VoskresenskayaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- LNYC Loft, LLC v. Hudson Opportunity Fund I, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Legurnic v. CicconeDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2014
- Najjar Group v. West 56th HotelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Segal v. CooperAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.