Case Name: Richard Sciaraffo, Appellant, v. Joseph LaMattina et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2003-04-14
Citations: 304 A.D.2d 644
Docket Number: 
Parties: Richard Sciaraffo, Appellant, v Joseph LaMattina et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 304
Pages: 644–645

Head Matter:
Richard Sciaraffo, Appellant, v Joseph LaMattina et al., Respondents.
[757 NYS2d 497]

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for conspiracy to commit fraud, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated February 15, 2002, which granted the motion of defendants Joseph LaMattina, Paul Lemole, and Agatha Yennella Sciaraffo, joined by the defendant Regina Palumbo, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
In support of the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, evidence was submitted that the plaintiffs allegations were insufficient to support a cause of action alleging civil conspiracy to defraud him out of his funds, and the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in response (see generally New York Univ. v Continental Ins. Co., 87 NY2d 308, 318 [1995]; Knowles v City of New York, 176 NY 430, 437 [1903]; Gould v Community Health Plan of Suffolk, 99 AD2d 479 [1984]; Lapis Enters. v International Blimpie Corp., 84 AD2d 286, 292 [1981]). Moreover, to the extent the complaint purports to allege causes of action to recover damages for legal malpractice or conversion, those causes of actions are time-barred (see CPLR 214 [4], [6]). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Krausman and Rivera, JJ., concur.