Filed Date: 10/16/2000
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
In an action to recover damages
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court correctly ruled that under the circumstances presented, the defendant did not, as a matter of law, have a duty to avoid mis-advising the plaintiff, his fellow Town Councilman, regarding whether the Town of Brookhaven would compensate the plaintiff for his legal expenses in defending against Federal criminal charges (see, Delcor Labs. v Cosmair, Inc., 169 AD2d 639; cf., Kimmell v Schaefer, 89 NY2d 257; AFA Protective Sys. v American Tel. & Tel. Co., 57 NY2d 912). The complaint is devoid of any indication that a special relationship existed between the parties such that the defendant undertook a duty to impart accurate information to the plaintiff (see, Prudential Ins. Co. v Dewey, Ballantine, Bushby, Palmer & Wood, 80 NY2d 377; Ossining Union Free School Dist. v Anderson LaRocca Anderson, 73 NY2d 417; Rotanelli v Madden, 172 AD2d 815). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Schmidt, JJ., concur.