Case Name: Patricia Kelly et al., Respondents, v. Michele Maniscalco et al., Defendants, and Frances M. Forgione et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2005-09-19
Citations: 21 A.D.3d 996
Docket Number: 
Parties: Patricia Kelly et al., Respondents, v Michele Maniscalco et al., Defendants, and Frances M. Forgione et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 21
Pages: 996–997

Head Matter:
Patricia Kelly et al., Respondents, v Michele Maniscalco et al., Defendants, and Frances M. Forgione et al., Appellants.
[800 NYS2d 847]

Opinion:
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud, the defendants Frances M. Forgione and Forgione Financial Services, Inc., appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (M. Garson, J.), dated September 17, 2003, as denied those branches of their motion which were pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the plaintiffs' first, second, and sixth causes of action of the amended complaint insofar as asserted against them.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the appellants' contention, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of their motion which was to dismiss so much of an amended complaint as alleged breach of fiduciary duty as against them. The court properly found, inter alia, that such allegations related back to the original complaint and, therefore, were timely interposed (see CPLR 203 [f]).
The plaintiffs' allegations of fraud as against the appellants were adequate and were stated with sufficient particularity (see CPLR 3016 [b]; Houbigant, Inc. v Deloitte & Touche, 303 AD2d 92 [2003]).
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit (see Lavin v Kaufman, Greenhut, Lebowitz & Forman, 226 AD2d 107 [1996]). Adams, J.P., Ritter, Goldstein and Fisher, JJ., concur.