Court Opinion

ID: 5836906
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 22:41:22.24964+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:38.444695
License: Public Domain

Apart from the fact that the complaint amounts to an impermissible collateral attack on plaintiffs divorce judgment, it fails to state a cause of action (see CPLR 3211 [a] [7]). The fraud allegations are insufficiently detailed (see CPLR 3016 [b]), and the remaining allegations consist of bare legal conclusions (see Caniglia v Chicago Tribune-N.Y. News Syndicate, 204 AD2d 233 [1994]). Concur — Andrias, J.P, Saxe, Sweeny, Acosta and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.