ARNOLD v. GRANT

Plaintiff, who is also the plaintiff in a divorce matter in which his wife is represented by defendants herein, failed to support his pleading of a cause of action under Judiciary Law § 487 with allegations that adverse court rulings in the matrimonial action were based on acts of deceit by defendant attorneys ( see Melnitzky v Owen, 19 AD3d 201), or allegations pleading the required elements of fraud ( see Manna Fuel Oil Corp. v Ades, 14 AD3d 666), including detrimental reliance ( see New York City Tr. Auth. v Morris J. Eisen, P.C., 276 AD2d 78, 86). The failure to plead detrimental reliance is also fatal to plaintiffs cause of action for notary liability under Executive Law § 135 ( Rastelli v Gassman, 231 AD2d 507, 508), which, in any event, is pleaded in conclusory terms without any specificity.

We have reviewed plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them without merit.