Case Name: Adelaide Productions, Inc., et al., Respondents, v. BKN International AG et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2005-02-24
Citations: 15 A.D.3d 316
Docket Number: 
Parties: Adelaide Productions, Inc., et al., Respondents, v BKN International AG et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 15
Pages: 316–316

Head Matter:
Adelaide Productions, Inc., et al., Respondents, v BKN International AG et al., Appellants.
[789 NYS2d 881]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard B. Lowe, III, J.), entered March 12, 2004, which denied defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The complaint sufficiently alleges new facts concerning defendants' purportedly fraudulent intentions (see 175 E. 74th Corp. v Hartford Acc. & Indent. Co., 51 NY2d 585, 590 n 1 [1980]), as evidenced by their subsequent conduct (see Tomkins PLC v Bangor Punta Consol. Corp., 194 AD2d 493 [1993], lv dismissed 82 NY2d 888 [1993]), so as to withstand a motion to dismiss on grounds of issue preclusion. Defendants' assertion that their actions were ratified by plaintiffs is not sufficient to warrant dismissal at this juncture.
We have examined defendants' remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Sullivan, Ellerin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.