Civil Procedure Cases
Show: 1 day 1 week 1 month All
Custom (decided):
Clear all
Coverage since February 25, 2025
✉️ New decisions, briefed in your inbox every morning — subscribe to Daily Case Law, free →

Civil Procedure

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Matter of Rahman v. City of New York — Provisional City Employees Can Be Demoted Without a Hearing, First Department Rules

The First Department reverses a Supreme Court order annulling a DOC demotion, holding that provisional appointments under Civil Service Law § 65 carry no tenure and no right to a hearing — and that a provisional appointment does not ripen into permanent status through the passage of time, only through civil service examination.

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Leffler v. Kotick — Defamation Defendant Barred From Raising Privilege Defense He Strategically Withheld in First Summary Judgment Motion

The First Department applies the law of the case doctrine to bar a pro se defamation defendant from asserting privilege on a second summary judgment motion, where he had deliberately withheld the defense in the first motion and the prior appellate decision found his statements went to a ‘nonprivileged party.’

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Edward Roberts, LLC v. Shipman & Goodwin LLP — Law Firm Cannot Limit Malpractice Damages by Blaming Client’s Own Misrepresentations

The First Department reverses a trial court’s limitation of legal malpractice damages, holding that whether a client’s misrepresentations to Walmart constituted an intervening superseding cause raises a triable issue of fact — and that $40 million in EPA-embargoed inventory losses are not capped by the client’s separate fraud.

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Duane v. New York City Housing Authority — NYCHA Chelsea Houses Demolition Challenge Dismissed as Time-Barred

The First Department dismisses an Article 78 challenge to NYCHA’s redevelopment plan for the Elliot and Chelsea Houses, holding that the four-month CPLR 217(1) limitations period began running from NYCHA’s July 28, 2025 record of decision — leaving the December 22, 2025 filing untimely by nearly a month.

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Century Indemnity Co. v. Archdiocese of New York — Abuse Victims Denied Intervention in Insurance Coverage Suit Without a Judgment

The First Department holds that sexual abuse claimants cannot intervene in their abuser’s insurance coverage declaratory judgment action until they obtain a judgment against the insured, as Insurance Law § 3420(b)(1)’s specific judgment requirement overrides CPLR 1012(a)(2)’s broader intervention right.

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Trinity Centre LLC v. City National Bank — First Department Upholds Civil Contempt for Restraining Notice Violation by Bank-Creditor

The First Department upholds civil contempt liability for City National Bank’s violation of a CPLR 5222(b) restraining notice, holding that a debtor’s payments to the bank on a separate debt are still ‘property in which the judgment debtor has an interest’—and that full satisfaction of the judgment does not moot the contempt claim.

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Board of Mgrs. of Washington Ct. Condominium v. Carl — First Dept. Affirms Summary Judgment for Condo Board on Unpaid Common Charges

The First Department affirmed summary judgment for a New York City condominium board on its claim for unpaid common charges, holding that an abatement defense raised only a dispute about the amount — not liability — which is properly resolved by a referee, and that defendants’ need for additional discovery was speculative.

Appellate Division, First Department
Uncategorized

Backer v. Parsons — First Dept. Reverses and Dismisses Medical Malpractice Action as Time-Barred; Plaintiff Failed to Establish Continuous Treatment

The First Department reversed denial of summary judgment in a medical malpractice action, holding it was time-barred under CPLR § 214-a because plaintiff sought no further treatment after a post-operative evaluation more than two and a half years before filing suit — and a note in the chart scheduling a follow-up visit that plaintiff never attended did not extend the limitations period under the continuous treatment doctrine.

Scroll to Top