KNK Enters., Inc. v Harriman Enters., Inc.

Annotate this Case
KNK Enters., Inc. v Harriman Enters., Inc. 2006 NY Slip Op 07709 [33 AD3d 872] October 24, 2006 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, December 13, 2006

KNK Enterprises, Inc., Respondent,
v
Harriman Enterprises, Inc., et al., Appellants.

—[*1]

In an action to recover damages for fraud, the defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Peck, J.), entered December 3, 2004, which, after a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against them in the principal sum of $77,500.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the complaint is dismissed.

To prevail on a claim of fraud, a plaintiff must show that it actually relied on the purported fraudulent statements and that its reliance was reasonable or justifiable (see Harris v Camilleri, 77 AD2d 861, 863 [1980]). A party cannot claim reliance on a misrepresentation when he or she could have discovered the truth with due diligence (see East 15360 Corp. v Provident Loan Socy. of N.Y., 177 AD2d 280 [1991]). Here, the plaintiff, who was represented by counsel, decided to proceed with the transaction, despite knowing that it had not received full information concerning the transaction; thus its reliance cannot be considered reasonable or justifiable.

In light of our determination, we need not address the parties' remaining contentions. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Mastro and Dillon, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.