124 A.D.3d 727
N.Y. App. Div.2015Background
- Action to recover on a promissory note and a personal guarantee arising from a loan; Hunter Group allegedly defaulted on payments.
- Defendant Michael Secondo answered with a counterclaim under 42 USC §§ 1985 and 1986.
- Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase moved to dismiss the counterclaim for failure to state a claim and to discontinue the action with prejudice.
- Supreme Court Nassau County granted the motion to dismiss the counterclaim and discontinue the action with prejudice.
- Court applied liberal pleading standard and concluded no cognizable 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985, 1986 claims.
- On appeal, Secondo’s remaining contention was deemed meritless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the counterclaims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1985–1986 stated cognizable claims. | Chase contends counterclaims fail under CPLR 3211(a)(7). | Secondo contends counterclaims are adequate. | Yes; counterclaims properly dismissed. |
Key Cases Cited
- J.P. Morgan Sec. Inc. v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 21 NY3d 324 (NY Court of Appeals 2013) (liberal pleading standard applies to 3211(a)(7) analysis)
- Mandarin Trading Ltd. v. Wildenstein, 16 NY3d 173 (NY Court of Appeals 2011) (claims must fit any cognizable legal theory)
- Sokoloff v. Harriman Estates Dev. Corp., 96 NY2d 409 (NY Court of Appeals 2001) (pleadings afforded liberal construction for 3211(a)(7))
- Leon v. Martinez, 84 NY2d 83 (NY Court of Appeals 1994) (reviewing court accepts allegations as true for 3211(a)(7))