Courts will dismiss breach of contract claims based on nondisclosure agreements where the plaintiff fails to identify specific confidential information allegedly misused. And fraud claims fail as a matter of law when a sophisticated party relies on oral assurances contradicted by written disclosures.

Financial abuse of seniors and other vulnerable adults is among the most damaging and the least visible forms of investor harm. It arises when age, illness, cognitive decline, or dependence on trusted professionals erodes an individual’s ability to evaluate advice or resist coercion, even while legal capacity nominally remains intact.

In prior BLOG articles, we discussed the court’s power to toll the accrual of interest in mortgage foreclosure actions.

New York limits judicial intrusion into arbitration awards, reflecting the core principles of finality, deference to arbitrators’ rulings, and the narrow grounds for vacatur under CPLR 7511.

In today’s article, we examine the elements and heightened pleading requirements for fraudulent inducement claims under New York law, with a focus on the justifiable reliance element.

By: Jonathan H. Freiberger A basic tenet of contract interpretation is that “agreements are construed in accord with the parties’ intent.” Greenfield v. Philles Records, Inc. , 98 N.Y.2d 562, 569 (2002) (citations omitted); see also SM Owner, LLC v. Envoy Towers Co., L.P. , 245 A.D.3d 973 (2 nd  Dept. 2026). It is equally fundamental that the “best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in their writing.” Greenfield , 98 N.Y.2d at 569 ( quotin

In Kim v. XP Sec., LLC, the Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the denial of summary judgment in a wrongful termination action, reiterating settled principles of contract interpretation: clear, unambiguous agreements between sophisticated, counseled parties are enforced according to their plain meaning, without recourse to extrinsic evidence.

By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Minihane v. Brown , 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 01505 (2d Dept. Mar. 18, 2026), the Appellate Division, Second Department, addressed when the statute of limitations begins to run on a demand promissory note. The defendant borrowed $19,000 pursuant to a note that provided repayment was due only upon written demand, which could be made no earlier than January 1, 2015. Although the lender did not make a demand until September 2023, the borrower argued that the six

By Jonathan H. Freiberger On March 17, 2026, the Appellate Division, First Department, decided HSBC  Bank USA, N.A. v. Nicholas , a mortgage foreclosure action that addresses many of the issues raised in our prior BLOG articles. HSBC  involves the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act  (“FAPA”), and the statute of limitations in foreclosure actions. By way of brief background, FAPA went into effect in December of 2022, and “represents the Legislature’s response to litigation strat