Opinion · New York Court of Appeals
Borkowski v. Borkowski
39 N.Y.2d 982
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- New York Court of Appeals
- Jurisdiction
- New York
- Date
- 1976-07-06
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- “It is not essential ... that punitive damages be allowed in a fraud case only where the acts have been aimed at the public generally”
- fraud on public not always essential, so long as conduct at issue was sufficiently "gross, wanton, or willful ... or ... morally culpable"
- punitive damages may be awarded in case of gross and wanton fraud even absent allegations of public wrong
- punitive dam ages may be awarded in case of gross and wanton fraud even absent allegations of public wrong
- it is “not essential ... that punitive damages be allowed in a fraud case only where the acts had been aimed at the public generally.”
- “It is not essential, as the Appellate Division stated, that punitive damages be allowed in a fraud case only where the acts had been aimed at the public generally.”
- defrauding seriously ill patient of his insurance benefits
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Borkowski v. Borkowski. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 111 opinions
Memorandum. Order. of the Appellate Division affirmed, without costs.
It is not essential, as the Appellate Division stated, that punitive damages be allowed in a fraud case only where the acts had been aimed at the public generally. Nevertheless, the proof in this case does not establish such gross, wanton, or willful fraud or other morally culpable conduct to a degree sufficient to justify an award of punitive damages. At least the Appellate Division was entitled to so conclude. (See, generally, Walker v Sheldon, 10 NY2d 401, 404-405.)
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.