Hyland Law PLLC, Reston, VA (Timothy B. Hyland of the bar of the State of Virginia admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for appellants.

Dentons US LLP, New York (Richard M. Zuckerman of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Melvin L. Schweitzer, J.), entered on September 5, 2014, which, upon reargument, granted defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiffs' first, second, fourth and fifth causes of action as barred by a release, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and defendant's motion denied.

Plaintiffs' claims against defendant's predecessor in interest were carved out from the release at issue; accordingly, those claims are not precluded as a matter of law (CDR Créances S.A.S. v Cohen, 104 AD3d 17, 29 [1st Dept 2012], affd in relevant part 23 NY3d 307 [2014]). The carve-out provision was intended to specifically anticipate the arguments raised by defendant. By enforcing the carve-out provision, this Court is giving effect to the intent of the parties to the release (Evans v Famous Music Corp., 1 NY3d 452, 458 [2004]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Feinman and Clark, JJ.