Opinion
2013-01-22
DRAGON HEAD LLC, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Steven Munro ELKMAN, et al., Defendants, Deutsche Bank, Alex Brown, etc., Defendant–Respondent.
Russ & Russ, P.C., Massapequa (Jay Edmond Russ of counsel), for appellant. Murphy & McGonigle, P.C., New York (Theodore R. Snyder of counsel), for respondent.
Russ & Russ, P.C., Massapequa (Jay Edmond Russ of counsel), for appellant. Murphy & McGonigle, P.C., New York (Theodore R. Snyder of counsel), for respondent.
FRIEDMAN, J.P., RENWICK, MANZANET–DANIELS, ROMÁN, CLARK, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Werner Kornreich, J.), entered June 14, 2012, which granted defendant Deutsche Bank, Alex Brown, a Division of Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the complaint as against it, and denied plaintiff's cross motion to amend the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's allegations against Deutsche Bank are not entitled to be deemed true, since they consist of bare legal conclusions and factual assertions that are flatly contradicted by the documentary evidence showing that Deutsche Bank was not a party to the written agreements at issue ( see Biondi v. Beekman Hill House Apt. Corp., 257 A.D.2d 76, 81, 692 N.Y.S.2d 304 [1st Dept.1999], affd. 94 N.Y.2d 659, 709 N.Y.S.2d 861, 731 N.E.2d 577 [2000] ). In support of its noncontractual causes of action, plaintiff does not sufficiently allege, nor do the evidentiary submissions show, that any relationship, contractual, fiduciary, or otherwise, existed between it and Deutsche Bank, or that Deutsche Bank possessed or exercised control over any of the property at issue ( see e.g. Roslyn Union Free School Dist. v. Barkan, 16 N.Y.3d 643, 653, 926 N.Y.S.2d 349, 950 N.E.2d 85 [2011];Colavito v. New York Organ Donor Network, Inc., 8 N.Y.3d 43, 827 N.Y.S.2d 96, 860 N.E.2d 713 [2006];Bradkin v. Leverton, 26 N.Y.2d 192, 199, 309 N.Y.S.2d 192, 257 N.E.2d 643 n. 4 [1970];Georgia Malone & Co., Inc. v. Rieder, 86 A.D.3d 406, 408, 926 N.Y.S.2d 494 [1st Dept.2011], affd. 19 N.Y.3d 511, 950 N.Y.S.2d 333, 973 N.E.2d 743 [2012];Kopelowitz & Co., Inc. v. Mann, 83 A.D.3d 793, 798, 921 N.Y.S.2d 108 [2nd Dept.2011] ).
Plaintiff failed to submit a proposed amended pleading with his motion for leave to amend the complaint ( seeCPLR 3025[b] ).