People v. Liberty Mutual InsurancePeople v. Liberty Mutual Insurance
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J.), entered March 28, 2007, which denied defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, the motion granted to the extent of dismissing the fifth cause of action and all claims within the first, third and fourth causes of action based upon contingent commission agreements, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.
The Attorney General stated valid claims against defendants for their participation in a bid-rigging scheme in violation of the
Nor are the bid-rigging claims time-barred, since the amended complaint alleges defendants’ participation in the bid-rigging scheme within three years of the filing of the action (
Nor did the Donnelly Act bid-rigging claims involve conduct that is regulated by
However, the court did err in failing to dismiss in its entirety the fifth cause of action, which alleges breach of fiduciary duty, since, absent a special relationship that does not exist here, an insurance agent or broker owes no common-law duty to its customer other than to obtain the policy requested within a reasonable period of time, or to inform the customer that it could not do so (see Murphy v Kuhn, 90 NY2d 266, 270 [1997]).
Therefore, except as stated herein, valid claims are stated by the Attorney General with respect to bid-rigging to sustain the first, second, third and fourth causes of action in the amended complaint.
We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Williams and Renwick, JJ. [See 15 Misc 3d 1110(A), 2007 NY Slip Op 50574(U).]