OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

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

The damages sought by plaintiffs, for purely economic loss, are too speculative as a matter of law to sustain plaintiffs’ causes of action and the complaint, therefore, was properly dismissed (see, Tobin v Grossman, 24 NY2d 609, 615-616 [citing Battalla v State of New York, 10 NY2d 237, 242]; cf. Friedland v Myers, 139 NY 432, 435 [damages may be recovered provided that they are proximate in effect, neither speculative nor uncertain in character and were reasonably foreseen as a consequence of the wrong]). Accordingly, we need not decide *811 whether the decision of defendant’s building inspector involved discretionary or ministerial conduct (see, Rottkamp v Young, 21 AD2d 373, affd on opn below 15 NY2d 831).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone concur; Judge Hancock, Jr., taking no part.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.