City of Roseville Employees' Retirement System v. Dimon

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Melvin L. Schweitzer, J.), entered January 16, 2015, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court correctly determined that plaintiff failed to adequately plead demand futility based on defendants’ lack of disinterest or breach of the duty of loyalty (see Rales v Blasband, 634 A2d 927, 936 [Del 1993]). The complaint fails to allege particularized facts showing the substantial likelihood of defendants’ personal liability as a result of any intentional misconduct, that they consciously failed to implement any sort of risk monitoring system or that, having implemented such a system, they consciously disregarded red flags (see e.g. Security Police & Fire Professionals of Am. Retirement Fund v Mack, 93 AD3d 562 [1st Dept 2012]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Moskowitz and Gische, JJ.