Lerner v. Fleet Bank, N.A.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Rule 9(b) applies to a claim that defendants had “actual knowledge of fraud”
• holding that an aiding and abetting claim under New York law requires ʺan allegation that such defendant had actual knowledge of the breach of dutyʺ
• holding that inaction constitutes substantial assistance “only if the defendant owes a fiduciary duty directly to the plaintiff”
• holding that while “’red flags’ . . . may have put the bank[] on notice that some impropriety may have been taking place, those alleged facts do not create a strong inference of actual knowledge.”
• explaining that “[t]o establish liability for aiding and abetting fraud,” a plaintiff “must show ... the existence of a fraud”
• noting that allegations that a party “suspected fraudulent activity” were not sufficient to “raise an inference of actual knowledge”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named Lerner v. Fleet Bank, N.A.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Lerner v. Fleet Bank, N.A.
  Second Circuit· 2003-01-22· cited 253×
• Lerner v. Fleet Bank, N.A.
  E.D. New York· 2001-05-22· cited 5×