§Why CasetextPricing

B.F., et al., Respondents,v.Reproductive Medicine Associates of New York, LLP, et al., Appellants.

Brief

32 Cited authorities

  1. Mandarin v. Wildenstein

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 741 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 1,603 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff must allege a misrepresentation or a material omission of fact which was "false and known to be false"

  2. 511 West 232nd Owners Corp. v. Jennifer Realty Co.

    98 N.Y.2d 144 (N.Y. 2002)   Cited 2,080 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiffs sufficiently pled a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by alleging that the defendant, which contracted to convert its building into a cooperative, rejected bona fide purchase offers from prospective tenants

  3. J.A.O. Acquisition Corp. v. Stavitsky

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 1196 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 393 times
    Holding that there was no reasonable reliance because the "plaintiff was or should have been aware" of the financial situation of the company despite the defendant's representations

  4. Ely-Cruikshank Co. v. Bank

    81 N.Y.2d 399 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 491 times
    Holding that the statute of limitations accrues from time of breach

  5. Simcuski v. Saeli

    44 N.Y.2d 442 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 765 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, where equitable estoppel applies, "burden is on the plaintiff to establish that the action was brought within a reasonable time after the facts giving rise to the estoppel have ceased to be operational"

  6. Hecht v. City of New York

    60 N.Y.2d 57 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 378 times
    Upholding Appellate Division's dismissal of negligence complaint because gap in sidewalk was trivial and therefore not actionable

  7. Putter v. N Shore Univ Hosp

    7 N.Y.3d 548 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 178 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding equitable estoppel "inappropriate as a matter of law" because defendant's alleged misstatement "did not alter [plaintiff's] timely awareness of the facts requiring him to make further inquiry before the statute of limitations expired"

  8. Hain v. Jamison

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 8583 (N.Y. 2016)   Cited 133 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a factual dispute over proximate cause precluded summary judgment

  9. Massie v. Crawford

    78 N.Y.2d 516 (N.Y. 1991)   Cited 197 times
    Concluding that a physician's insertion of an IUD was for routine gynecological examinations and not therapy to correct her medical condition, thus the continuous treatment exception did not apply

  10. Rizk v. Cohen

    73 N.Y.2d 98 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 177 times
    Holding that plaintiff's claim for fraudulent concealment failed where plaintiff "relie[d] on the same act which forms the basis of his negligence claim — Dr. Cohen's alleged improper advice to plaintiff that there was nothing wrong" and, as such, "plaintiff's allegations do not establish that Dr. Cohen, acting with knowledge of prior malpractice, made subsequent misrepresentations in an attempt to conceal his earlier negligence"