Bay Towers Assoc. v. Lightstone Group, LLC

Bay Towers Assoc., 2025 NY Slip Op 01160 (Appellate Division First Department 2025) · Appellate Division, First Department · February 27, 2025 · No. Index No. 653753/18; Appeal No. 3800; Case No. 2023-03090

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of the Lightstone defendants, dismissing claims for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, accounting, concerted action, and civil conspiracy. The court found that the defendants established their prima facie entitlement to dismissal because any fiduciary duty did not extend to shielding the plaintiff from a third-party lender's foreclosure, and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate actual damages from alleged nondisclosure. Furthermore, the fraud claim was properly dismissed as derivative of a contract claim without an independent duty, which also required dismissing the related conspiracy and accounting claims.

Court
Appellate Division, First Department
Writing for the Court
Manzanet-Daniels, J.P.; Kennedy; González; Rosado; Michael
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
February 27, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 653753/18; Appeal No. 3800; Case No. 2023-03090
Procedural posture
Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County order granting summary judgment to Lightstone defendants
Precedential value
published
Parties
Bay Towers Associates; Bay Towers Company v. The Lightstone Group, LLC
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

breach of fiduciary dutyfraudpartnership lawcommercial litigationreal estate

Practice areas

corporate lawcommercial litigationreal estate

Questions Presented

  1. Whether summary judgment was proper on the breach of fiduciary duty claim
  2. Whether summary judgment was proper on the fraud claim
  3. Whether summary judgment was proper on the accounting claim
  4. Whether summary judgment was proper on the concerted action claim
  5. Whether summary judgment was proper on the civil conspiracy claim

Holdings

  1. Summary judgment was proper because D.A.L. Realty's fiduciary duty did not extend to protecting Bay Towers Associates from the foreclosure action and the plaintiff could not show damage from the alleged nondisclosure.
  2. Summary judgment was proper because the fraud claim arose from the same facts as the contract claim and did not allege a separate duty breach.
  3. Summary judgment was proper because the plaintiff failed to raise a material issue of fact showing the annual audit reports were incomplete.
  4. Summary judgment was proper because the underlying fraud claim was dismissed, rendering the concerted action and civil conspiracy claims untenable.

Key quotations

The Lightstone defendants established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the breach of fiduciary duty claim, as D.A.L. Realty's fiduciary duty did not extend to protecting plaintiff Bay Towers Associates (BTA) from the foreclosure action of defendant MPM Limited Partnership, a third‑party lender.
The Lightstone defendants also established their entitlement to summary judgment on the fraud claim, as it arises from the same set of facts as the contract claim, seeks identical damages, and does not allege a breach of any duty collateral to or independent of the parties' agreement.

Factual background

The Lightstone defendants, including D.A.L. Realty as general partner of Bay Towers Company, were sued for breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, accounting, concerted action, and civil conspiracy related to a foreclosure action by MPM Limited Partnership. The partnership agreement vested authority to increase loans in D.A.L. Realty, and the plaintiff lacked a contractual relationship with the other Lightstone defendants.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, New York County entered an order on March 30, 2023 granting summary judgment in favor of Lightstone Group, LLC and related entities, dismissing the plaintiff's breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, accounting, concerted action, and civil conspiracy claims. The appellant appealed that decision to the Appellate Division, First Department.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…