New York Court of Appeals, 1981

Roney v. Janis

New York Court of Appeals · Decided June 9, 1981

53 N.Y.2d 1025; 425 N.E.2d 872; 442 N.Y.S.2d 484; 1981 N.Y. LEXIS 2550

Cases that cite this one

22 later published cases cite this decision.

Hutton v. Klabal (District Court, S.D. New York 1989)
SKR Resources, Inc. v. Players Sports, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1996)
Shochat v. Weisz (District Court, E.D. New York 1992)
Hartman v. Harris (District Court, S.D. New York 1992)
Inn Chu Trading Co., Ltd. v. Sara Lee Corp. (District Court, S.D. New York 1992)
Raffaele v. Designers Break, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1990)
Paper Corp. of the United States v. Schoeller Technical Papers, Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1990)
Carlucci v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (District Court, E.D. New York 1986)
Songbird Jet Ltd., Inc. v. Amax Inc. (District Court, S.D. New York 1984)
PC Connection, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corporation (District Court, D. New Hampshire 2023)
Streit v. Bombart (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
William Doyle Galleries, Inc. v. Stettner (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Fulton v. Hankin & Mazel, PLLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Bierman v. Limoncelli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Bierman v. Limoncelli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
High Tides, LLC v. DeMichele (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
International Oil Field Supply Services Corp. v. Fadeyi (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
Hudson Valley Paper Co. v. La Belle (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
Bernstein v. Oppenheim & Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
Ruse v. Inta-Boro Two-Way Radio Taxi Associates Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
Tutak v. Tutak (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1986)
AFA Protective Systems, Inc. v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1982)

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff’s complaint fails to state a cause of action for fraud and deceit. As the Appellate Division noted, the alleged misrepresentations upon which plaintiff bases his claim of fraud are nothing more than the usual expressions of hope and statements of expectation made by one about to be married. Plaintiff’s complaint makes no factual assertions which, if proven, could lead a trier of fact to conclude otherwise. The mere fact that the expectations of the parties were eventually frustrated is an insufficient base upon which to predicate a claim of fraud.

Having determined that plaintiff’s complaint states no cause of action, we need not address the other grounds for dismissal urged by defendant.

*1028Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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