Taylor v. Purdy

How courts have described this case

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

• allowing breach of fiduciary duty claims to go forward, even if duplicative of breach of contract claims, to the extent they were asserted against a Defendant who was not a party to the breach of contract claims
• discussing how most New York courts opt to apply Rule 9(b) to negligent misrepresentation claims, especially when the “claim is based upon the same set of facts as those upon which a fraud claim is grounded ….”
• discussing how most New York courts opt to apply Rule 9(b) to negligent misrepresentation claims, especially when the “claim is based upon the same set of facts as those upon which a fraud claim is grounded ….”
• setting forth elements of fraud under New York law and noting that “under New York law, an action for fraudulent inducement requires the demonstration of: (1) a material misrepresentation or omission that induced the party to sign the contract; (2) scienter; (3
• “[I]t is clear that Aetna now controls, and, for that reason, the Court will subject the Plaintiffs’ negligent misrepresentation claim under New York law to Rule 9(b) scrutiny.”
• “Plaintiffs [are not] relieved of their obligation at this stage of the litigation, to adequately allege ‘how’ and/or ‘why’ the statements were fraudulent.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).