The IAS Court properly dismissed the cause of action for breach of defendants' duty to conduct a fair auction on the ground that the disclaimers in the parties' Confidentiality Agreement preclude the existence of any such duty (see, Goodstein Constr. Corp. v. City of New York, 80 N.Y.2d 366), and properly dismissed the causes of action for fraud on the ground that the disclaimers were sufficiently specific to bar any claim of reliance on oral misrepresentations (see, Goldberg v. KZ 72nd, 171 A.D.2d 525, 527). Contrary to plaintiff's contentions, the disclaimers do not purport to exculpate defendants for breaches of duties imposed by law or in the public interest and thus are not subject to avoidance for intentional acts, i.e., fraudulent acts (compare, Danann Realty Corp. v. Harris, 5 N.Y.2d 317, with Gross v. Sweet, 49 N.Y.2d 102), and apply to the individual defendants as well as the corporate party to the Confidentiality Agreement (see, Oxford Commercial Corp. v Landau, 12 N.Y.2d 362, 365-366).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Asch, Rubin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.