From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ceres v. Shearson Lehman Brothers, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 14, 1996
227 A.D.2d 222 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

May 14, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Arber, J.).


Plaintiffs' complaint and papers in opposition to the motions fail to indicate that the offering plan included actionable representations of fact and "`definite positive projections that might require later correction'" on which plaintiffs relied to their detriment ( San Leandro Emergency Med. Group Profit Sharing Plan v. Philip Morris Cos., 75 F.3d 801, 811). Leave to replead would not be appropriate, since there is no reason to believe that plaintiffs could correct the deficiencies of the pleading, it appearing that there is nothing to add as to alleged misrepresentations in any of the key documents and plaintiffs failing to suggest that there are any additional extrinsic facts that would somehow make the documents actionable.

We have considered plaintiffs' remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Wallach, J.P., Ross, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Ceres v. Shearson Lehman Brothers, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 14, 1996
227 A.D.2d 222 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Ceres v. Shearson Lehman Brothers, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CARIN CERES et al., Appellants, v. SHEARSON LEHMAN BROTHERS, INC., Now…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 14, 1996

Citations

227 A.D.2d 222 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 264

Citing Cases

Platinum Partners Value Arbitrage Fund LP v. Kroll Assocs. Inc.

C. Gross NegligenceTo the extent that Platinum seeks to amend its complaint so as to comply with CPLR…

Platinum Part. Value Arbit. Fund v. Kroll Assoc.

Platinum's fraud claim is thus dismissed on this ground as well ( see Empire 33rd LLC v Forward Assn. Inc.,…