Summary
In Monaco, the plaintiff's cause of action for fraud was dismissed by the court because it was not adequately pleaded and was time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations, and was precluded by the res judicata doctrine, and was barred by a prior settlement and release.
Summary of this case from Lucchese v. Yi Chan LinOpinion
2019–13473 Index No. 2563/19
01-27-2021
Domenico MONACO, etc., appellant, v. Benjamin VAN MEERENDONK, respondent.
Domenico Monaco, Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se.
Domenico Monaco, Brooklyn, NY, appellant pro se.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, COLLEEN D. DUFFY, VALERIE BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action to recover damages for fraud, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Carolyn E. Wade, J.), dated September 27, 2019. The order granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for fraud, relating to transactions occurring in the 1980s which were the subject of prior litigation (see Monaco v. Van Meerendonk, 65 A.D.3d 1308, 885 N.Y.S.2d 613 ), and a settlement and general release executed by the plaintiff. The defendant moved, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) and (7) to dismiss the complaint, and the Supreme Court granted that branch of the defendant's motion. The plaintiff appeals.
Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendant's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5) and (7) to dismiss the complaint. The plaintiff's fraud causes of action are not adequately pleaded (see CPLR 3016[b] ; Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Sinclair, 68 A.D.3d 914, 916, 891 N.Y.S.2d 445 ) and, in any event, are barred by the applicable statute of limitations (see CPLR 213[8] ; 203[g]; Marasa v. Andrews, 69 A.D.3d 584, 584, 892 N.Y.S.2d 494 ), precluded by the doctrine of res judicata (see Matter of Singer v. Windfield , 125 A.D.3d 666, 667, 3 N.Y.S.3d 381 ), and barred by the prior settlement and release (see Corvino v. CBS, Inc., 92 A.D.2d 536, 537, 459 N.Y.S.2d 99 ).
RIVERA, J.P., HINDS–RADIX, DUFFY and BRATHWAITE NELSON, JJ., concur.