In Hamlet on Olde Oyster Bay Home Owners Assn., Inc. v. Holiday Org., Inc. (65 AD3d 1284, 887 N.Y.S.2d 125), the Second Department upheld the dismissal of causes of action alleging fraudulent inducement and negligent misrepresentation against the sponsor's parent organizations that were based on unrealistic budget projections included in the offering plan, as required by the Martin Act and the Attorney General's implementing regulations. The Second Department also upheld the dismissal of the causes of action alleging breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, negligent misrepresentation, and negligence or malpractice asserted against the engineering and architectural firms. When the certifications in the offering plans executed by the engineer were pursuant to the Attorney General's implementing regulations, they may not form the basis of private causes of action against such engineer (Id. at 1287-1288). In Hamlet the plaintiffs argued that they were third-party beneficiaries of the sponsor's contracts with the defendant architects and engineers based on their certifications in the offering plan. The Supreme Court, Nassau County, rejecting that argument, dismissed the plaintiff's breach-of-contract claims against the defendant architects and engineers. The Second Department affirmed on the ground that the certifications in the offering plans executed by those defendants were pursuant to the Attorney General's implementing regulations and, as such, may not form the basis of private causes of action against them (65 AD3d at 1287-1288).