
    W. Robert Curtis, Appellant, v David Bouley et al., Respondents.
    [8 NYS3d 107]—
   Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered April 30, 2013, which denied plaintiffs motion to vacate a prior order denying his motion for a license pursuant to RPAPL 881 to enter adjacent premises, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as moot. Order, same court and Justice, entered July 12, 2013, which denied plaintiffs motion to amend the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

By the time the April 30, 2013 order was issued, as the motion court observed therein, defendants no longer had possession or control over the premises that plaintiff sought to enter, and plaintiff had been granted access by the new occupant; indeed, plaintiff concedes on appeal that he has made the repairs for which he sought access.

The proposed amended complaint fails to state a cause of action for fraud since it does not allege that plaintiff reasonably relied on defendant David Bouley’s alleged misrepresentations to his detriment (see Meyercord v Curry, 38 AD3d 315 [1st Dept 2007]).

Concur — Acosta, J.R, Saxe, Richter, Gische and Kapnick, JJ.  