The First Department dismisses RPAPL 1921 and Real Property Law § 275 mortgage discharge penalty claims as time-barred under CPLR 214(2)’s three-year limitations period, and holds that American Pipe tolling does not carry over to a successive class action after the first was voluntarily dismissed.
The First Department affirmed denial of summary judgment where conflicting expert opinions about whether a building’s heavy granite staircase caused a sidewalk crack created a triable issue of fact, and expressly declined to follow Second Department precedent requiring non-municipal defendants to establish affirmative misfeasance before being liable for a cause-and-create theory of sidewalk liability.
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.
The First Department reversed summary judgment for a commercial building owner in a slip-and-fall case, holding that the plaintiff’s testimony about smelling detergent and seeing mop streaks after the fall raised a credibility contest that precluded summary judgment, even though the building’s porter testified he had not mopped the stairwell that day.
The First Department affirmed summary judgment dismissing a contractor’s mechanic’s lien foreclosure claim under New York’s Lien Law willful exaggeration defense after the contractor admitted including over $1 million for work never performed, but denied summary judgment on the owner’s conditions-precedent defense because the parties’ course of conduct raised factual issues about whether notice requirements were waived.
A divided First Department reversed the denial of summary judgment for a pharmacy that had no statutory or contractual duty to maintain an abutting sidewalk, holding that once a commercial tenant establishes it had no duty to maintain the sidewalk, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to produce evidence of causation — and proximity of a crack to the tenant’s cellar door is insufficient.
The Appellate Division, First Department, affirms that a single-member LLC that holds title to a defect-ridden condominium unit cannot recover its individual member’s personal relocation and living expenses by reverse-piercing its own corporate veil—New York disfavors reverse veil-piercing outside bankruptcy and estate contexts—while reinstating the LLC’s claims for investigation costs directly tied to the unit.
The First Department unanimously affirmed extinguishment of a mechanic’s lien under Lien Law §17 after the elevator contractor failed to foreclose within one year, holding that CPLR 321(c) automatic substitution did not apply (counsel died before proceedings began) and that a conclusory law-office-failure excuse cannot vacate a default when the lien has already expired by operation of law.
The First Department affirmed cancellation of a $786,450 mortgage and promissory note under RPAPL 1501(4), holding that FAPA’s retroactive elimination of the RPAPL 1301(3) toll bars lenders from claiming extra limitations time during the pendency of a prior foreclosure action — constitutional challenges to FAPA’s retroactivity rejected.
The First Department reversed and granted tenants summary judgment, holding that a vacancy lease signed before but commencing on the HSTPA’s June 14, 2019 effective date is subject to rent stabilization — execution date is irrelevant; the commencement date controls whether the HSTPA’s repeal of luxury deregulation applies.
First Department affirms summary judgment for business buyers, holding that an asset purchase agreement covering ‘leases of personal property and equipment’ did not assume the former tenant’s commercial real estate lease, which required an express assumption under New York contract interpretation principles.
The First Department reversed summary discharge of a mechanic’s lien, holding that Lien Law § 19(6) authorizes discharge only for facial defects in the notice of lien—substantive validity challenges belong in a foreclosure action, not a summary discharge proceeding.
The First Department affirmed that a good guy guarantor was released upon surrender because the tenant was current on accrued rent obligations—restoration costs that had not yet accrued as of the surrender date do not prevent the guaranty’s discharge.