Panel Dismisses Malpractice Suit Against Ruskin Moscou

Uniondale-based Ruskin Moscou Faltischek has won dismissal of a fraud and legal malpractice lawsuit filed by investment firm Fortress Credit Corp. for allegedly issuing “utterly false” legal opinion letters used by Marc Dreier to defraud Fortress out of $50 million in furtherance of his Ponzi scheme. An Appellate Division, First Department, panel of Justices Peter Tom (See Profile), John Sweeny (See Profile), Dianne Renwick (See Profile), Helen Freedman (See Profile) and Sheila Abdus-Salaam (See Profile) ruled yesterday that Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Charles Ramos (See Profile) had erred in refusing to dismiss the case, Fortress Credit v. Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, 651023/10.

The short, unsigned opinion said only that the case must be dismissed for the same reasons as Fortress Credit v. Dechert, 89 AD3d 615 (2011)—”a case involving virtually identical facts and allegations” which Fortress filed against Dechert, also over Dreier-related letters. In that case, the First Department ruled that Dechert could not be responsible for fraud in connection with opinion letters it issued vouching for investments in companies controlled by real estate developer Sheldon Solow. In preparing the letters, Dechert reviewed documents purportedly bearing Solow’s signature, which later turned out to be forged by Dreier. The court held that Dechert had no reason to suspect the fraud and no duty to investigate.