Majority
p. 428John McFarland et al., Appellants, v Opera Owners, Inc., Respondent. [937 NYS2d 591]
The IAS court properly dismissed the breach of contract claim because plaintiffs concededly failed to comply with express
p. 429
conditions precedent to the contract (see Oppenheimer & Co. v Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon & Co., 86 NY2d 685 , 690 [1995]).
The court properly dismissed the fraud claim as barred by the merger clause, “as is” clause, and other disclaimers (see Rivietz v Wolohojian, 38 AD3d 301 [2007]). Moreover, plaintiffs’ allegations of defendant’s intent to breach the contract are insufficient to state a cause of action for fraud (see New York Univ. v Continental Ins. Co., 87 NY2d 308 , 318 [1995]; Board of Mgrs. of the Chelsea 19 Condominium v Chelsea 19 Assoc., 73 AD3d 581 , 582 [2010]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.R, Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Román, JJ.
Cases cited
- Oppenheimer & Co. v. Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon & Co. 86 NY2d 685 at 690 p. 429
- Rivietz v. Wolohojian 38 AD3d 301 p. 429
- New York University v. Continental Insurance 87 NY2d 308 at 318 p. 429
- Board of Managers v. Chelsea 19 Associates 73 AD3d 581 at 582 p. 429