Plaintiffs' fraud claims are not materially distinguishable from their time-barred claims for malpractice and negligence and accordingly were properly dismissed as duplicative of those claims (see Atton v. Bier, 12 A.D.3d 240 ). Moreover, the putative fraud claims state no cognizable claim since they do not sufficiently allege that defendants knew that the paternity report issued by them was inaccurate and deliberately concealed that circumstance from plaintiffs (see id.; Monaco v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 213 A.D.2d 167 , lv dismissed in part and denied in part 86 N.Y.2d 882 ).
MARCUS v. LINDSLEY F. KIMBALL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK BLOOD CENTER
24 A.D.3d 187 (2005)
806 N.Y.S.2d 30
LARRY MARCUS et al., Appellants, v. LINDSLEY F. KIMBALL RESEARCH INSTITUTE OF THE NEW YORK BLOOD CENTER, Respondent, et al., Defendants.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
December 8, 2005.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.