Himmelstein v. Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.

• Decision Date: 02 May 2019
• Docket Number: Index 650932/17,9198
• Citation: 172 A.D.3d 405,100 N.Y.S.3d 227
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Parties: HIMMELSTEIN, MCCONNELL, GRIBBEN, DONOGHUE & JOSEPH, LLP, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. MATTHEW BENDER & COMPANY, INC., a Member of LexisNexis Group, Inc., Defendant–Respondent.

172 A.D.3d 405
100 N.Y.S.3d 227

HIMMELSTEIN, MCCONNELL, GRIBBEN, DONOGHUE & JOSEPH, LLP, et al., Plaintiffs–Appellants,
v.
MATTHEW BENDER & COMPANY, INC., a Member of LexisNexis Group, Inc., Defendant–Respondent.

9198
Index 650932/17

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

ENTERED: MAY 2, 2019

100 N.Y.S.3d 228

Fishmanlaw, PC, New York (James B. Fishman of counsel), and Anderson Kill, PC, New York (Jeffrey E. Glen of counsel), for appellants.

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, New York (Anthony J. Dreyer of counsel), for respondent.

Acosta, P.J., Friedman, Manzanet–Daniels, Gesmer, Singh, JJ.

172 A.D.3d 405

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered February 20, 2018, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs allege that defendant Matthew Bender & Company Inc.'s New York

100 N.Y.S.3d 229

Landlord–Tenant Law, commonly known as the Tanbook, is "rife with inaccuracies and omissions," at least with respect to rent-regulated housing in New York City. The Tanbook is a compilation of statutes, regulations, and editorial contents such as summaries and commentaries, addressing New York rent regulation and landlord-tenant law. Plaintiffs allege that there have been such inaccuracies and omissions in annual editions of the Tanbook for at least six years preceding 2017.

The breach of express warranty claim, based on the representations defendant made about the content of the Tanbook in

172 A.D.3d 406

the book's "Overview" and on websites on which the book was sold, was correctly dismissed because the Terms and Conditions pursuant to which defendant sold the Tanbook to plaintiffs contain a merger clause and a disclaimer of warranties, which states, in bold type, "We do not warrant the accuracy, reliability or currentness of the materials contained in the...