Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002

Sokol v. Addison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 15, 2002

293 A.D.2d 600; 742 N.Y.S.2d 311; 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3722

Cases that cite this one

16 later published cases cite this decision.

Barns & Farms Realty, LLC v. Novelli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Cohen v. Stevanovich (District Court, S.D. New York 2010)
Filler v. Hanvit Bank (2d Cir. 2005)
Cavalry Investments, LLC v. Household Automotive Finance Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
Toobian v. Toobian (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
McSpedon v. Levine (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp. v. Scialpi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Ferrandino & Son, Inc. v. Wheaton Builders, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Levin v. Kitsis (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
Hylan Electrical Contracting, Inc. v. MasTec North America, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2010)
Thyroff v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
Rocchio v. Biondi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Salvatore v. Kumar (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
Pfeiffer v. Jacobowitz (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Ward v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Romano v. Romano (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for fraud and breach of *601fiduciary duty, the defendant June Pelzer appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated June 22, 2001, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

A cause of action to recover damages for fraud does not lie where, as here, the only fraud claimed relates to an alleged breach of contract (see Shah v Micro Connections, 286 AD2d 433; WIT Holding Corp. v Klein, 282 AD2d 527; Weitz v Smith, 231 AD2d 518). The claimed misrepresentations in this case were that money was loaned to the defendants with a promise that the money would be paid back. Such promises, at best, demonstrate a misrepresentation of an intention to perform under a contract, which are insufficient to allege fraud (see WIT Holding Corp. v Klein, supra; Place v Ginshurg, 280 AD2d 656).

There is no evidence to support the plaintiffs’ cause of action to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty. Even assuming that such a duty existed between the plaintiffs and the appellant, there is no evidence that the appellant had superior knowledge or that the plaintiffs reasonably relied upon the appellant’s superior knowledge in deciding to loan money to the business run by the defendant Thomas Addison (see generally WIT Holding Corp. v Klein, supra).

New York does not recognize civil conspiracy to commit a tort as an independent cause of action (see Pappas v Passias, 271 AD2d 420). Since the fraud claim should have been dismissed, the conspiracy cause of action cannot stand alone. Similarly, in the absence of a valid breach of fiduciary duty claim, the cause of action for a constructive trust cannot stand (see Ellner v Pope, 285 AD2d 624). Santucci, J.P., Feuerstein, S. Miller and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.