New York Law Watch
Appellate Division, Second Department: quarter 3 of 2026
For Appellate Division, Second Department, quarter 3 of 2026, Law Watch lists 250 indexable decisions dated September 2, 2026 to September 30, 2026 across 5 decision weeks.
295 decision records: 250 meet the substance floor; 45 records are held from search listings.
Week ending October 3, 2026
Browse the week ending October 3, 2026
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v Bryant2026 NY Slip Op 05570
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s determination that the defendant rebutted the presumption of proper service, finding her affidavit insufficient to contradict the process server’s specific allegations. Consequently, the court denied the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment and foreclosure order, and denied the plaintiff’s cross-motion to extend service as academic.
- U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. v Aprile2026 NY Slip Op 05569
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the order granting service by publication because he failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default or evidence of fraud, mistake, or excusable neglect. Additionally, the court held that the defendant was precluded from asserting a statute of limitations defense because he had not successfully vacated his default in the action.
- U.S. Bank Trust N.A. v Mosseri2026 NY Slip Op 05568
The court reversed the judgment of foreclosure and sale because the plaintiff failed to establish that it obtained physical possession of the original note and allonge. The submitted records were insufficient to prove that the plaintiff was the real party in interest or that the transaction involved the transfer of the original documents.
- Town of Greenburgh v State of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05567
The court held that Laws of 2024, chapter 7 is a general law rather than a special law, despite containing a specific exemption for Edgemont, and therefore did not require a home rule message. Additionally, the individual plaintiffs lacked standing to maintain the third and fifth causes of action because their asserted injuries were speculative and not distinct from the general public.
- Siepel v Krywak2026 NY Slip Op 05566
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to compel an additional independent medical examination. The court found that the defendant failed to establish the necessity for a second examination, as the initial examiner had already reviewed the plaintiff’s medical records and did not indicate that further examination was required.
- Scamardella v A. Duie Pyle, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05565
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, holding that the City was not a proper party and that the school defendants owed no duty to warn against the open and obvious condition of the wooden pallet. The court found that the defendants established the condition was readily observable and not inherently dangerous, thereby defeating the plaintiff’s claim.
- Sagala v Zirs Servs., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05564
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of showing the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury. Specifically, the defendants failed to submit competent medical evidence establishing that the plaintiff’s head and brain injuries were not serious or not caused by the accident.
- Rojas v 1388 Bushwick Ave, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05563
The court reversed the summary judgment dismissal against the property owner because the owner failed to establish a lack of constructive notice of the sidewalk defect. Conversely, the court affirmed the dismissal against the construction management company because the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the applicability of the Espinal exceptions.
- Real Estate Mortgage Network, Inc. v Perez2026 NY Slip Op 05562
The death of a defendant in a foreclosure action automatically stays proceedings pending the substitution of a personal representative, rendering any subsequent court determinations a nullity. Consequently, the amended order and judgment of foreclosure and sale entered after the decedent’s death were invalid.
- Pligavko v Chimples2026 NY Slip Op 05561
The defendants waived the affirmative defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by stipulating to it and answering the original complaint without raising the defense. The Supreme Court erred in sua sponte denying the summary judgment motion based on jurisdiction and should have dispensed with the requirement to answer the amended complaint, which only corrected paragraph numbering.
- Persaud v Muoio2026 NY Slip Op 05560
The court affirmed the lower court’s order enforcing an oral fee-sharing agreement between two attorneys, holding that the agreement was valid and enforceable based on the objective manifestations of the parties’ intent and their subsequent conduct. The court determined that the trial counsel was entitled to 75% of the fees as agreed, rejecting the original counsel’s claim for a larger share.
- People v Rodriguez2026 NY Slip Op 05558
The appellate court affirmed the denial of youthful offender status but modified the sentence to run concurrently with other sentences as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice. The court found the original sentence excessive under the circumstances presented.
- People v Perez2026 NY Slip Op 05557
The appellate court affirmed the defendant’s convictions for assault in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, finding the evidence legally sufficient and the verdict not against the weight of the evidence. The court also rejected the defendant’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and vindictive sentencing.
- People v Morochomorocho2026 NY Slip Op 05556
The court affirmed the sentence because the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precluded appellate review of the excessive sentence claim. The court determined that an improper purported waiver of rights under Penal Law § 60.12 did not invalidate the separate, valid appeal waiver.
- People v Herrnkind2026 NY Slip Op 05554
The appeal regarding the denial of resentencing under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act was dismissed as academic because the defendant had already served her sentence. The court affirmed the denial of the motion to seal records and proceed anonymously, finding the defendant failed to demonstrate compelling circumstances or establish she was a victim of a sex offense.
- People v Farquharson2026 NY Slip Op 05553
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the admission of Molineux evidence, Sandoval ruling, and expert testimony on domestic violence were proper exercises of discretion. The court determined that the admission of the complainant’s delayed disclosure was harmless error given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
- Park National Capital Funding, LLC v 670 Park Place, LLC, et al.2026 NY Slip Op 05548
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of a motion to dismiss the foreclosure action under CPLR 3211(a)(4) because the defendant failed to demonstrate a substantial identity of parties or substantially the same relief sought in the related action. Additionally, the court upheld the condition requiring the defendant to post a $100,000 bond as a prerequisite for the stay of proceedings.
- Newgarden v Havemeyer Estates, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05547
The court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on the breach of contract claim for unpaid license fees after the pandemic, as the force majeure defense did not apply post-shutdown. It also granted summary judgment to the LLC member, dismissing the account stated claim against him personally due to the lack of evidence to pierce the corporate veil.
- Matter of Zhang v Feiner2026 NY Slip Op 05546
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order and remitted the matter for a hearing to determine the validity of service of process on the Town Supervisor. The court found that the initial service failed to comply with CPLR 7804(c) and that the subsequent service was sufficiently disputed by specific facts to warrant a hearing.
- Matter of Westchester County Dept. of Social Servs. v Davidson C.L.2026 NY Slip Op 05544
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order adjudicating the appellant as the father of the child, finding that he was equitably estopped from obtaining a genetic marker test. The court determined that the best interests of the child supported the application of equitable estoppel and that the lower court properly resolved credibility issues in favor of the mother’s testimony.
- Matter of Tkebuchava v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05543
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim, finding that the public corporation had actual knowledge of the essential facts of the accident and that no substantial prejudice was demonstrated. Consequently, the petitioner’s failure to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay did not bar the granting of the petition.
- Matter of Gil R. (Dan R.)2026 NY Slip Op 05541
The Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in awarding attorney’s fees and evaluator costs to the petitioner’s counsel and the court-appointed evaluator, as it provided an adequate explanation referencing the required factors. The appellate court affirmed the order denying the decedent’s motion to vacate the fee award.
- Matter of Naila P. (Althea P.)2026 NY Slip Op 05540
The Appellate Division reversed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s motion to modify the order of fact-finding and disposition. The court held that the mother was entitled to a suspended judgment and vacatur of the neglect finding based on her lack of prior history, compliance with services, and the child’s best interests.
- Matter of Nucci v Jonckers2026 NY Slip Op 05539
The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s denial of the father’s objections to an award of attorneys’ fees and a corresponding money judgment. The court found that the Support Magistrate providently exercised discretion in granting the fees under the totality of the circumstances, including the meritorious nature of the petition and the parties’ financial situations.
- Matter of Monahan v Zindman2026 NY Slip Op 05538
The Family Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to entertain the family offense petition because the parties did not share an intimate relationship as defined by statute. The court reversed the lower court’s order of fact-finding and disposition, dismissing the proceeding.
- Matter of Meyer v Nassau County Police Dept.2026 NY Slip Op 05537
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s award of attorneys’ fees, finding that the reduction to $12,000 was an improvident exercise of discretion. The court awarded $34,690.50, excluding fees for time spent on fee collection, based on the reasonable value of services rendered in the FOIL proceeding.
- Marcano v Suazo2026 NY Slip Op 05536
The Family Court properly registered and enforced an out-of-state custody decree because the mother failed to demonstrate that the issuing court lacked jurisdiction or that she lacked proper notice. The court also correctly declined to exercise temporary emergency jurisdiction as the mother did not establish an immediate emergency requiring state intervention.
- Matter of David J.M. (Linda V.)2026 NY Slip Op 05535
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s finding of neglect because the mother’s untreated mental illness placed the child at imminent risk of harm. The court determined that the evidence established neglect by a preponderance of the evidence, despite the mother’s failure to appear at the dispositional hearing.
- Matter of Maria M. v William S.2026 NY Slip Op 05534
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s findings that the father committed multiple family offenses, including stalking and assault, based on a fair preponderance of the evidence. The court also upheld the issuance of a five-year order of protection and the denial of the father’s request for substitution of counsel.
- Matter of Leviene v Horrell2026 NY Slip Op 05533
The Appellate Division reversed the Family Court’s finding of disorderly conduct because the evidence failed to establish that the appellant’s conduct was committed with the intent to cause, or recklessly posed a risk of causing, public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm. Consequently, the order of protection issued pursuant to that finding was vacated.
- Matter of Holden2026 NY Slip Op 05532
The court sustained charges of misappropriation of client funds and failure to exercise reasonable supervisory authority over the firm’s escrow accounts, finding that the respondent abdicated his fiduciary duties. Consequently, the respondent was suspended from the practice of law for a period of three years.
- Matter of Gathers v Gathers2026 NY Slip Op 05531
The Appellate Division reversed the Family Court’s denial of the father’s objections, holding that the Support Magistrate erred by including a one-time holiday payment in the calculation of the father’s gross income. The court remitted the matter for a recalculation of the basic child support obligation after excluding that nonrecurring payment.
- Matter of Garnet Health Med. Ctr. v People2026 NY Slip Op 05530
The Appellate Division affirmed the findings of civil contempt against the petitioner for violating court orders but modified the sanctions. The court held that because actual damages were not established, the daily fines imposed by the lower court were improper and must be replaced with a statutory fine of $250 plus reasonable costs and expenses.
- Matter of Garnet Health Med. Ctr. v People2026 NY Slip Op 05529
The court affirmed the denial of the petition to quash the Attorney General’s subpoena, finding that the requested documents were reasonably related to the investigation into the hospital’s toxicology testing policies. The court further held that the Office of the Attorney General qualified as a health oversight agency under HIPAA, thereby permitting the disclosure of patient records.
- Matter of Campbell2026 NY Slip Op 05527
The court affirmed the Special Referee’s report sustaining charges of professional misconduct against the respondent for failing to cooperate with a disciplinary investigation. The court imposed a six-month suspension from the practice of law, weighing the respondent’s mental health issues and remorse against her prior disciplinary history and the severity of her non-cooperation.
- Matter of Kaidyn C. (Kalleh F.)2026 NY Slip Op 05526
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order by deleting the finding that the mother medically neglected the child, as ACS failed to prove the mother did not seek or accept medical care. The court affirmed the findings of neglect based on the child’s sleeping environment and derivative neglect of the sibling.
- MTGLQ Investors, L.P. v Rivera2026 NY Slip Op 05525
The court held that the original foreclosure action was effectively discontinued as a matter of law when the plaintiff’s predecessor commenced a second foreclosure action without leave of court. Consequently, the court lacked jurisdiction to restore the original action to the active calendar, requiring the dismissal of the complaint against the defendant.
- Kopitova v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05524
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the plaintiff failed to validly serve a notice of claim by e-mail, which was not a prescribed method of service. The defendant did not waive the objection to the defective service because it promptly notified the plaintiff that it did not accept service via e-mail.
- Johnson v Brentwood Teachers Assn.2026 NY Slip Op 05523
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the union defendants for failure to state a cause of action and granted their motion for costs and attorneys’ fees under the Anti-SLAPP statute. However, the court reversed the lower court’s sua sponte dismissal of the claims against the candidate defendants, finding no extraordinary circumstances to warrant such relief.
- Harrison v Gabbaizadeh2026 NY Slip Op 05520
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the medical malpractice claims because the defendants established they did not depart from the accepted standard of care. The plaintiffs’ expert affirmation was deemed conclusory and speculative, failing to raise a triable issue of fact.
- Flagstar Bank, FSB v Roberts2026 NY Slip Op 05519
The court affirmed the order vacating a dismissal for abandonment because the plaintiff’s timely request for a judicial intervention and settlement conference constituted sufficient proceedings to negate intent to abandon the action. Additionally, the court held that the motion to vacate the dismissal order was not subject to a specific time limitation.
- Fernandez v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.2026 NY Slip Op 05518
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, finding that a triable issue of fact existed regarding whether the defendant Jet Blue spoliated video evidence after receiving a preservation demand. The court directed that an adverse inference charge be given at trial if the trier of fact determines that spoliation occurred.
- Estate of Gustavo Marcel Coba v Humberto Hernandez2026 NY Slip Op 05517
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion to enforce a stipulation of settlement because the plaintiff’s own submissions raised issues of fact regarding the legal capacity of the plaintiff’s attorney to enter into the agreement on behalf of the estate. Consequently, the court affirmed the order denying the appointment of a referee to sell the property.
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, etc., appellant, v Salah Mohamed, respondent, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 05516
The court held that a sua sponte dismissal of a foreclosure complaint was improper because the plaintiff’s failure to comply with a status conference order did not constitute the extraordinary circumstances required for such an action. Consequently, the dismissal order was vacated, the action was restored to the active calendar, and the matter was remitted for a determination on the merits of the motion to confirm the referee’s report.
- Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Hira2026 NY Slip Op 05515
The foreclosure action was time-barred because the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) prevents a voluntary discontinuance of a prior action from revoking the acceleration of the mortgage debt. Consequently, the six-year statute of limitations began running when the initial action was commenced, rendering the subsequent action filed more than six years later invalid.
- Data Mtge., Inc. v Money Source, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05514
The court affirmed summary judgment on the first cause of action regarding transfer fees but denied summary judgment on the second, third, and fourth causes of action due to contractual ambiguity and insufficient evidence. The court modified the order to grant summary judgment dismissing the counterclaim for breach of the confidentiality provision.
- Bourke v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05513
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s employment discrimination claims because the action was commenced almost five years after the adverse employment determination, exceeding the three-year statute of limitations. The plaintiff’s request for reconsideration did not toll the statute of limitations or allow him to circumvent the time bar.
- Board of Educ. of the Blind Brook-Rye Union Free Sch. Dist. v Kliment Halsband Architects2026 NY Slip Op 05512
The court affirmed the dismissal of negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation, and punitive damages claims because they were duplicative of the breach of contract claim. The court found that the plaintiff was seeking the benefit of its bargain and failed to allege an independent tort or duty separate from the contract.
- Bank of New York Mellon, etc., v Alida Izquierdo, et al., defendants, Marlon Izquierdo, appellant2026 NY Slip Op 05511
The appellate court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the foreclosure judgment and sale, finding that the defendant’s delay in seeking relief under CPLR 5015(a)(3) was unreasonable. The court also determined that the defendant failed to provide any basis for relief pursuant to CPLR 5015(a)(4).
- Banc of California, N.A. v Plumbing Supply Distribution, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05510
The Appellate Division reversed the order and judgment of foreclosure and sale because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to judgment. The court found that the plaintiff’s affidavit did not contain personal knowledge of the default and failed to attach the underlying business records, rendering the evidence inadmissible hearsay.
- Abdullah v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05508
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order, denying the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the serious injury threshold because the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact regarding causation. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on liability, finding that the rear-end collision established negligence and that the plaintiff was not comparatively at fault.
- Matter of Peña v Hermelyn2026 NY Slip Op 05507
The court held that outgoing members of the Kings County Democratic County Committee Executive Committee were not authorized to vote on rule amendments after the primary election, rendering the amendments invalid. However, the court modified the lower court’s judgment by removing the injunction against outgoing members exercising functions on substantial matters, as the 2019 amendment to Election Law § 2-112(1)(b) supersedes prior functus officio case law.
Week ending September 26, 2026
Browse the week ending September 26, 2026
- Matter of Vaiselberg v Caller2026 NY Slip Op 05462
The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition to set aside the primary election results because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the alleged irregularities were sufficiently large to affect the outcome. The court found that the missing reconciliation forms did not render the determination of the rightful nominee impossible.
- Weber v Barnett2026 NY Slip Op 05439
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of a preliminary injunction because the defendants failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or a danger of irreparable injury. The court determined that money damages were an adequate remedy for the alleged losses regarding the distribution of real property sale proceeds.
- TAB Equity Group, LLC v Sharestates Invs. DACL, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05438
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the breach of contract claims against the Toorak defendants because the plaintiff failed to identify which specific provision of the loan documents was breached. The tortious interference claim was also properly dismissed because there was no evidence that the defendants procured a breach of the contract of sale.
- Superior Air Conditioning and Heating, Inc. v Russo2026 NY Slip Op 05437
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s judgment granting summary judgment in lieu of complaint to the plaintiff, as the plaintiff established a prima facie case for recovery on an absolute and unconditional guaranty. The defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact to defeat the motion.
- Stanley Supply & Tool, Inc. v Smallwood2026 NY Slip Op 05436
The Appellate Division held that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to direct a nonparty to turn over monies pursuant to CPLR 5225, requiring the plaintiff to commence a special proceeding instead. Consequently, the court modified the order to deny the plaintiff’s cross-motion for turnover.
- SMG Automotive Holdings, LLC v Brooklyn Store, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05435
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to grant the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss several affirmative defenses that were without merit or abandoned, while affirming the denial of summary judgment on the first cause of action because the motion was premature. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the counterclaims because the plaintiff failed to meet its prima facie burden of eliminating triable issues of fact.
- Segura v Smith2026 NY Slip Op 05434
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the comparative negligence defense because the police report created a triable issue of fact regarding the plaintiff’s sudden stop. However, the court modified the order to grant summary judgment dismissing the defenses of failure to wear a seatbelt and assumption of risk, as the plaintiff established he was wearing a seatbelt and the doctrine was inapplicable.
- Rojas v Riverhead Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05432
The court affirmed summary judgment for the plaintiff on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim because the unsecured ladder shifted, causing the fall. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment for the school district on the contractual indemnification claim because it was not a party to the relevant agreement.
- Prospect Auto Sales & Repairs, Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.2026 NY Slip Op 05431
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment, determining that the complaint properly sought damages for breach of contract rather than a direct statutory violation. The court held that the defendant failed to meet its prima facie burden because its supporting affidavit was based on hearsay and it failed to provide the survey relied upon to justify its payment amount.
- Pierre v Sunrise Med. Labs.2026 NY Slip Op 05430
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to restore the action to the trial calendar because the prior order only decided the summary judgment motion against one defendant and did not dismiss claims against others. However, the court affirmed the denial of the motion to resettle the order to correct a footnote, as it was unnecessary to correct a nondispositive recitation of facts.
- People v Melter2026 NY Slip Op 05429
The County Court properly designated the defendant a level two sex offender because his request for a downward departure was unpreserved for appellate review. Furthermore, the court found that a downward departure was not warranted as the mitigating factors were already accounted for in his risk score.
- People v Tucker2026 NY Slip Op 05425
The defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the oral colloquy was ambiguous and the court failed to discuss the written waiver, allowing appellate review of the excessive sentence claim. However, the sentence was affirmed because it was not excessive.
- People v Rivera2026 NY Slip Op 05420
The court held that the defendant’s purported appeal waiver was invalid because the trial court failed to properly advise him of his rights and confirm his understanding of the waiver. Consequently, the appellate court reviewed the sentence and affirmed it as not excessive.
- People v Radhakrishnan2026 NY Slip Op 05417
The People failed to establish that they exercised due diligence in their discovery obligations, rendering the initial certificate of compliance invalid. Consequently, the speedy trial time had expired before the supplemental discovery was disclosed, justifying the dismissal of the indictment.
- People v Mills2026 NY Slip Op 05415
The court held that the purported waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the record did not establish that the People, rather than the court, required it as a condition of the plea. Consequently, the court reviewed the excessive sentence claim and affirmed the sentence as not excessive.
- People v Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 05414
The appellate court affirmed the sentence, determining that the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precluded review of his contention that the sentence was excessive. The court found that the record demonstrated the waiver was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.
- Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v Dimura2026 NY Slip Op 05406
The Supreme Court properly vacated a prior order entered upon the defendants’ default due to improper service of motion papers, which deprived the court of jurisdiction. Additionally, the court properly dismissed the complaint against the defendants because the plaintiff failed to strictly comply with RPAPL 1304 by mailing a single 90-day notice jointly addressed to both borrowers rather than separate notices to each.
- C.N. v Sigma Delta Tau Socy.2026 NY Slip Op 05405
The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) prevents the enforcement of predispute arbitration agreements in negligence actions that have a logical nexus to a sexual assault dispute, even if the defendant did not commit the assault. The court held that the EFAA applies broadly to claims that ‘relate to’ the underlying sexual assault, rendering the arbitration clause unenforceable.
- Murphy v Gallegos2026 NY Slip Op 05404
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, holding that the defendants established prima facie that the police officer did not act with reckless disregard for the safety of others. The officer’s slow and cautious maneuvering, despite a momentary lapse in judgment, did not meet the high threshold for reckless disregard required for liability under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104(e).
- Matter of Serpico-Maresca v Town of Hempstead2026 NY Slip Op 05403
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the Town acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within the statutory period. Additionally, the petitioner failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for the delay in serving the correct municipal entity.
- Matter of Roe v D’Aguanno2026 NY Slip Op 05402
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s motion to vacate a default order granting the father residential custody. The court found that the mother failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her failure to appear or a meritorious defense to the petition.
- Matter of Rizzotto v Romano2026 NY Slip Op 05401
The Supreme Court erred in denying the petition for judicial dissolution of a closely held corporation without conducting a hearing. Because the verified petition and supporting papers were prima facie sufficient to establish a basis for dissolution under Business Corporation Law § 1104-a, a hearing was required to resolve the conflicting claims regarding the relevant facts.
- Matter of Nostrand Drugs Rx, Inc. v Church Mut. Ins. Co.2026 NY Slip Op 05400
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the petition to vacate the master arbitrator’s award, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any statutory grounds for vacatur. The court emphasized that mere errors of law by the master arbitrator are insufficient to set aside the award.
- Matter of Nash v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05399
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the petition, granting the request to deem the late notice of claim timely served nunc pro tunc. The court found that the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable excuse for the delay due to his severe injuries and that the respondents had actual knowledge of the claim without substantial prejudice.
- Matter of Landa v Rockland County2026 NY Slip Op 05398
The court reversed the lower court’s dismissal, holding that the County’s failure to respond to the administrative appeal within the statutory time limit constituted a constructive denial, thereby satisfying the exhaustion of administrative remedies. The matter was remitted for an in camera inspection to determine if the withheld records were properly exempt from disclosure under FOIL.
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. Zoning Bd. of Appeals2026 NY Slip Op 05397
The Appellate Division affirmed the money judgment awarding attorneys’ fees and imposing a monetary sanction on the petitioner for frivolous conduct. The court held that the lower court providently exercised its discretion in determining the amount of fees and sanctions, noting that the failure to submit a retainer agreement was not fatal to the fee application.
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. Zoning Bd. of Appeals2026 NY Slip Op 05396
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the petitioner’s proceedings, finding that the Zoning Board of Appeals rationally determined the petitioner lacked standing because she failed to demonstrate direct harm distinct from the public at large. The court also upheld the lower court’s imposition of sanctions for frivolous conduct.
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. Planning Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 05395
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding for lack of standing because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a direct, non-speculative injury distinct from the general public. The court also affirmed the award of sanctions and attorneys’ fees to the respondents for filing a frivolous proceeding.
- Matter of Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v Villanueva2026 NY Slip Op 05393
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate an order staying arbitration, finding that the appellant failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for her default in opposing the petition. The court determined that conclusory assertions regarding missing medical records and police reports did not constitute a reasonable excuse without an explanation of efforts to obtain those documents.
- Matter of Mansani D. (Sitan S.D.)2026 NY Slip Op 05392
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s finding that the mother neglected her child and derivatively neglected her other child, as she failed to rebut the presumption of parental responsibility regarding the child’s ingestion of alcohol and marijuana. The court further upheld the disposition releasing the children to the father’s custody, determining it was in the children’s best interests given the mother’s impaired judgment and the father’s consistent compliance with supervision.
- Matter of Jayden (Annette D.C.-Maria S.)2026 NY Slip Op 05390
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s grant of adoption petitions, finding that the mother abandoned the children by failing to contact or communicate with them for a period exceeding six months. Consequently, the mother’s consent to the adoption was not required under Domestic Relations Law § 111(2)(a).
- Man Ling Chan Lam v Qing Yun Xiao2026 NY Slip Op 05389
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the bank, title company, and title closer because the plaintiff failed to allege specific facts showing those defendants intentionally misrepresented material facts or that the plaintiff relied on such misrepresentations. The court also upheld the denial of leave to amend, finding the proposed negligence and aiding and abetting fraud claims were speculative and conclusory.
- LaMarco v LaMarco2026 NY Slip Op 05388
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment of divorce because the motion was untimely and the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion to stay enforcement of money judgments and the award of attorney’s fees to the plaintiff.
- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v Gezlev2026 NY Slip Op 05387
The right to redeem a mortgage is extinguished as a matter of law upon the completion of a foreclosure sale, even if the redemption funds are wired shortly thereafter. Consequently, the foreclosure sale cannot be set aside based on the subsequent closing or the inadequacy of the bid price alone.
- Jagnow v Pekich2026 NY Slip Op 05386
The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendant declaring that the service of the notice to redeem was proper and that the tax deed was not null and void. The defendant made a prima facie showing that service complied with the Nassau County Administrative Code and due process, while the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
- Inc. Vil. of Freeport v Freeport Union Free Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05385
The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment declaring that the Village holds fee title to the property and the School District holds only a revocable license or easement in gross. The School District failed to demonstrate that legislative approval was plainly conferred for an easement appurtenant, as parkland is impressed with a public trust requiring specific legislative authorization for alienation.
- Hoefler v Shoreham-Wading Riv. Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05384
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, holding that the defendant school district established its prima facie entitlement to dismissal by demonstrating the air conditioning unit was an open and obvious condition that was not inherently dangerous. Consequently, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the property owner’s duty to warn or protect.
- Fezza v Legal Sea Foods, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05382
The court affirmed the dismissal of cross-claims against the contractor, holding that the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the Espinal exceptions. The contractor’s expert evidence was deemed insufficient to establish that its repair work launched an instrument of harm or created the dangerous condition.
- Federal National Mortgage Association v Cassis2026 NY Slip Op 05381
The defendant waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by filing a general notice of appearance and failing to raise the defense in a timely manner. Additionally, the defendant’s motion to vacate the note of issue was properly denied because it was untimely and failed to demonstrate unusual or unanticipated circumstances.
- DBW TL HOLDCO 2014, LLC v Kirk2026 NY Slip Op 05379
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to discontinue the action against one defendant and to amend the judgment. The court held that the motion should be granted because the parties reached a settlement and no substantial prejudice or improper results would arise from the discontinuance.
- Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc. v Town of Eastchester2026 NY Slip Op 05378
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the plaintiffs failed to file a required notice of claim under Town Law § 65(3). The court determined that the exception for ongoing violations did not apply and that the notice was a condition precedent to maintaining the action.
- Bank of America, N.A. v Discobath Products, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05377
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the bank, finding that the plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment by submitting an analyst’s affidavit with business records demonstrating the defendants’ default. The court rejected the defendants’ argument that the motion was premature because discovery had not yet occurred, noting that mere speculation about future evidence is insufficient to defeat summary judgment.
Week ending September 19, 2026
Browse the week ending September 19, 2026
- Zeltser v Kukolev2026 NY Slip Op 05353
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to dismiss the defendants’ counterclaims for breach of contract, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, accounting, and partition, as they were barred by the statute of frauds or failed to state a cause of action. However, the court affirmed the denial of dismissal for the unjust enrichment counterclaims, finding that the statute of frauds does not preclude quasi-contractual recovery.
- Wright v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05352
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the third-party complaint against the City of New York because the property owners failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the City’s affirmative acts of negligence. The court determined that the City’s failure to respond to service requests for a fire hydrant constituted nonfeasance, not an affirmative act of negligence, and thus did not shift liability from the property owners.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v Hilario2026 NY Slip Op 05351
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to establish standing under UCC 3-804 regarding a lost note. However, the court modified the lower court’s order to delete the sua sponte dismissal of the complaint, finding that no extraordinary circumstances warranted such dismissal.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v Dresdner2026 NY Slip Op 05350
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c). The court held that the plaintiff failed to take proceedings for entry of judgment within one year of default and failed to establish a reasonable excuse for the delay.
- Williams v Orange County2026 NY Slip Op 05349
The appeal is dismissed because the plaintiff did not oppose the defendants’ motion to dismiss and therefore is not considered aggrieved under CPLR 5511. The court held that a party is not aggrieved when they ask for relief against them, which they do not oppose, and that relief is granted.
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Curtis2026 NY Slip Op 05348
The court reversed the judgment of foreclosure and sale because the plaintiff failed to establish strict compliance with RPAPL 1304 by not proving that at least five of the listed housing counseling agencies served the borrower’s region. The court held that this statutory defect could not be disregarded under CPLR 2001, requiring the denial of summary judgment on the complaint.
- Visco v Riverhead Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05347
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion for a unified trial on liability and damages because they failed to establish that the nature of the injuries was inextricably intertwined with the issue of liability. The plaintiffs also failed to demonstrate that their expert’s theory could not be adequately proven during the liability phase of a bifurcated trial.
- U.S. Bank, N.A. v Morrison2026 NY Slip Op 05346
The court held that a plaintiff’s failure to move for a judgment of foreclosure and sale as directed by a prior order was not sufficient grounds for a sua sponte dismissal of the complaint. Consequently, the lower court’s order dismissing the action without prejudice was reversed and the action was restored to the active calendar.
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v McKenzie2026 NY Slip Op 05345
The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to assemble a proper record on appeal. The record was inadequate for meaningful appellate review due to the omission of all relevant papers before the Supreme Court on the cross-motion for leave to renew.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Kotei2026 NY Slip Op 05343
The Supreme Court erred in denying the plaintiff’s motion for a judgment of foreclosure and sale because the 2017 notice of pendency sufficiently complied with statutory requirements. The plaintiff was entitled to file a successive notice of pendency to comply with RPAPL 1331, even though a prior notice had expired.
- U.S. Bank Trust, National Association, etc., v Edmond Dweck, etc., et al., respondents, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 05342
The plaintiff failed to establish its standing to commence the action because the purported allonge containing an endorsement in blank was not firmly affixed to the note as required by UCC 3-202(2). Consequently, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and to strike the defendants’ affirmative defenses.
- Tsintsadze v Preziotti2026 NY Slip Op 05341
The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the personal injury complaint because the defendants established that the plaintiff’s spinal injuries were degenerative and not caused by the accident. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact because his experts did not address the defendants’ radiologist’s findings in a nonconclusory manner.
- Torres v Frank & Sal, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05340
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, holding that the grocery store did not owe a duty to the plaintiff because it lacked the authority to control the third-party tortfeasor after he left the premises and had no special relationship with the plaintiff.
- Steuber v LeBlanc2026 NY Slip Op 05339
The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of demonstrating that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d). Consequently, the summary judgment dismissing the complaint was reversed and the complaint was reinstated against the defendants.
- Stella v Doak2026 NY Slip Op 05338
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s declaration that the parties share possession and ownership of two companion dogs. The court upheld the application of the ‘best interest of the companion animal’ standard, noting the defendant did not challenge its use outside of a matrimonial action.
- Sosa v Gonzaga2026 NY Slip Op 05337
The Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to grant the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction because the plaintiff failed to comply with the service directives in the order to show cause. Consequently, the order granting the motion was reversed and the motion was denied.
- Sierra v Mount Sinai Health Sys., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05336
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss the disability discrimination and failure to accommodate claims. The court found that the complaint sufficiently pleaded a cause of action under the NYSHRL and NYCHRL, and the motion was properly denied because it relied on unsupported arguments outside the record.
- Shanahan v County of Rockland2026 NY Slip Op 05335
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s fraud and tortious interference claims, determining that while res judicata did not bar the action, the complaint failed to state a cause of action. The court found the plaintiff failed to allege actual pecuniary loss or justifiable reliance for fraud, and failed to allege malice or improper means for tortious interference.
- Santorelli Builders, LLC v 146 Norris Realty, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05334
The court affirmed the lower court’s decision to vacate a default judgment because the plaintiff did not receive actual notice of the scheduled conference. The court held that in the absence of actual notice, a party’s failure to appear is a nullity and vacatur is required as a matter of law.
- Rogoff v Long Is. Univ.2026 NY Slip Op 05333
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the breach of contract claim because the employment contract did not contain language entitling the plaintiff to the alleged transition terms. The court held that extrinsic evidence of pre-contract conversations could not be considered to interpret the unambiguous contract.
- Ramirez v Red Cloud Trucking, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05332
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order granting summary judgment on liability because the defendant driver’s affidavit raised triable issues of fact. The defendant provided a non-negligent explanation for the rear-end collision by alleging the plaintiff driver made a sudden stop without reason.
- Pryce v Nationstar Mtge., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05331
The court reversed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew, finding it timely because no final judgment had been entered. Upon renewal, the court granted summary judgment to cancel the mortgage, holding that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act prevented the prior foreclosure discontinuance from resetting the statute of limitations.
- Pires v Daniella Levi & Assoc., P.C.2026 NY Slip Op 05330
The court affirmed the dismissal of the legal malpractice claim against the Ugalde defendants because the engagement letter conclusively limited their representation to workers’ compensation. The court reversed the denial of dismissal against the Levi defendants because the plaintiff failed to plead specific facts showing that their negligence proximately caused the loss of a viable personal injury claim.
- People v Edwards2026 NY Slip Op 05329
The court affirmed the designation of the defendant as a level three sex offender, finding that the County Court properly assessed points for continuous sexual misconduct and substance abuse. The defendant failed to meet the burden of proof required to sustain an application for a downward departure from the presumptive risk level.
- People v Sukram2026 NY Slip Op 05328
The court vacated the defendant’s adjudication as a second violent felony offender and substituted an adjudication as a second felony drug offender, reducing the sentence from 14 years to 8 years of imprisonment. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding that the photo array was not unduly suggestive and that the suppression of physical evidence was properly denied or constituted harmless error.
- People v McNeil2026 NY Slip Op 05327
The court affirmed the judgment, finding that the trial court did not improperly shift the burden of proof by directing defense counsel to address the defendant’s identity on cross-examination. Additionally, the court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel or that the sentence was imposed in vindictive retaliation for exercising his right to trial.
- People v Kirton2026 NY Slip Op 05326
The appellate court affirmed the conviction for second-degree murder and criminal possession of a weapon, finding that the defendant’s statements were voluntary and the evidence was sufficient. Although the court found an error in admitting a SIM card due to a broken chain of custody, it deemed the error harmless given the overwhelming proof of guilt.
- People v Jorge2026 NY Slip Op 05325
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the County Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the guilty plea. The court further determined that the defendant’s valid appeal waiver precluded review of grand jury evidence, venue, and duplicitous counts, leaving only jurisdictional and voluntariness challenges, which were meritless.
- People v Harley2026 NY Slip Op 05324
The court vacated the duration of the orders of protection because they exceeded the maximum period permissible under CPL 530.13(4)(A) by failing to credit jail time served. The matter was remitted for a new determination of the duration, while the orders remain in effect pending that determination.
- People v Daley2026 NY Slip Op 05323
The court affirmed the conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, finding that the evidence of constructive possession was legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court also held that the search warrant was supported by probable cause and that the defendant failed to demonstrate a legitimate basis for disclosing the confidential informant’s identity.
- Peach, Inc. v RJR Services, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05322
The Appellate Division modified the judgment to reflect the outstanding principal balance of $12,152, holding that the trial court erred in considering extrinsic evidence of an oral agreement to vary the terms of the integrated written instruments. The court applied the parol evidence rule, noting that the promissory note and business purchase agreement were clear, unambiguous, and contained a merger clause.
- Olivares v Andacky2026 NY Slip Op 05321
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint because the defendant established a prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The evidence demonstrated that the plaintiff was negligent for driving across multiple lanes of traffic and that the defendant had only seconds to react, negating any comparative negligence.
- Nunez v Trustees of Columbia Univ.2026 NY Slip Op 05319
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff established a prima facie case for liability under Labor Law § 240(1) by showing the ladder moved for no apparent reason. The court determined that the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the plaintiff’s motion.
- NRT New York, LLC v Bespoke Real Estate, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05318
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint, finding that the claims for breach of contract and fraudulent concealment were barred by collateral estoppel. The court determined that the issues regarding the defendants’ concealment of information were necessarily decided against the plaintiff in a prior action.
- Ninth Street Corp. v Fernandez2026 NY Slip Op 05317
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion to vacate a default judgment because they failed to present a reasonable excuse for their default. Additionally, the defendants did not provide evidence of fraud, mistake, or other grounds warranting the court’s inherent power to relieve them from the judgment.
- Ninth Street Corp. v Fernandez2026 NY Slip Op 05316
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion to vacate a default judgment because they failed to present a reasonable excuse for their default. The court determined that the defendants’ claim that the complaint’s allegations were false constituted intrinsic fraud, which requires both a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious defense.
- Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Adekoje2026 NY Slip Op 05315
The appellate court reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion, holding that the conditional order of dismissal was defective for failing to provide proper statutory notice under CPLR 3216. Additionally, the court vacated the tolling of interest because the plaintiff was denied due process by not being afforded notice or an opportunity to be heard on that issue.
- Matter of Zimbardi v Incorporated Vil. of Manorhaven2026 NY Slip Op 05314
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order granting back pay because the Village failed to demonstrate that the petitioner was in privity with parties to a prior proceeding. Consequently, the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar the petitioner’s claim for back pay, entitlements, and benefits.
- Matter of Werner2026 NY Slip Op 05313
The court imposed reciprocal disbarment on the respondent based on his disbarment in Colorado for unauthorized practice of law. The court found that the respondent’s failure to respond to the order to show cause warranted the imposition of the same sanction as the out-of-state discipline.
- Matter of State of New York v Ernest D.2026 NY Slip Op 05312
The court affirmed the lower court’s order revoking the appellant’s release into a strict and intensive supervision and treatment regimen and directing his confinement to a secure treatment facility. The State successfully demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that the appellant remained a dangerous sex offender requiring confinement due to his inability to control his sexual behavior.
- Matter of Salvatore v South Country Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05311
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the petition to vacate the hearing officer’s determination, finding that the termination of the teaching assistant’s employment was supported by evidence and not arbitrary or capricious. The court held that the penalty was not disproportionate to the misconduct, which involved posting a racially inflammatory message on social media.
- Matter of Newsday, LLC v County of Nassau2026 NY Slip Op 05310
The court held that the County failed to provide particularized justification for denying disclosure of cybersecurity contract details and past public calendars, requiring an in camera inspection to determine redactions. The judgment was modified to direct the production of unredacted records for inspection and remitted the matter for a new determination on fees.
- Matter of McCracken v Whinnery2026 NY Slip Op 05309
The court modified the lower court’s judgment by deleting the provision directing retroactive benefits, affirming the annulment of the Board’s denial, and remitting the matter for new medical findings. The Medical Board failed to adequately explain its reasoning regarding the petitioner’s ability to perform specific job duties, and the record remained unclear on whether he was permanently incapacitated.
- Matter of Hillside Place, LLC v Housing & Community Renewal of the State of N.Y.2026 NY Slip Op 05308
The Appellate Division held that a prior order granting leave to amend pleadings to include rent increase claims was not law of the case because it did not resolve the merits. Consequently, the DHCR’s determination to remove the $45 per month rent increase was upheld as having a rational basis and not being arbitrary or capricious.
- Matter of Dopkin v County of Nassau2026 NY Slip Op 05307
The Commission’s determination was arbitrary and capricious because it failed to provide a factual basis for reaching a different result than it did for similarly situated candidates. The court annulled the determination and remitted the matter for the Commission to articulate reasons for its decision.
- Matter of Kelly C. v Chaya E.2026 NY Slip Op 05306
The Appellate Division reversed the Family Court’s determination that a preconception agreement did not exist for the second child, finding that the record supported the existence of such an agreement at the time of conception. Consequently, the non-biological partner established standing to seek parental access, and the matter was remitted for a best interests hearing.
- Matter of Borochov2026 NY Slip Op 05305
The court imposed reciprocal public censure on the respondent for professional misconduct, rejecting his argument that the conduct did not constitute misconduct in New York. The court found that the respondent’s admitted criminal act and failure to disclose his arrest to the Illinois Bar were also violations of New York professional conduct rules.
- Merchant Cash & Capital, LLC v Blueshyft, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05304
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order imposing a sanction on nonparty Mark Yosef, finding that his conduct as counsel was not frivolous under 22 NYCRR 130-1.1(c). Consequently, the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in awarding costs and attorney’s fees against Yosef.
- Mees v Buiter2026 NY Slip Op 05303
The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew her opposition to the dismissal of her complaint because she failed to demonstrate new facts or provide reasonable justification for her delay. Additionally, the court denied the motion to vacate the prior order under CPLR 5015(a)(3) due to an unreasonable delay and a failure to establish fraud or misconduct.
- Marchand v NPL Consulting Servs., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05302
The court affirmed the dismissal of the fraud and aiding and abetting fraud claims because the plaintiffs failed to adequately allege justifiable reliance, as the plaintiff was an experienced businessperson who did not conduct due diligence. The court also dismissed the General Business Law §§ 349 and 350 claims because the complaint alleged a private contract dispute rather than consumer-oriented conduct.
- Macri v Fluor Enters., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05301
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to Certa Pro, IBM, and Fluor Enterprises, finding that the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact regarding whether the defendants negligently created a dangerous condition by installing two visually identical walking surfaces without a warning. The court held that while the defendants established they did not know the flooring was slippery, the plaintiff’s expert evidence regarding improper application and lack of visual distinction precluded summary judgment.
- Lori Joseph Builders, Inc. v Torres2026 NY Slip Op 05300
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the defendant was not personally liable for payment under the contracts and that the agreements were unenforceable due to indefiniteness. The court also held that the plaintiff could not recover in quantum meruit for lack of evidence regarding the reasonable value of services.
- Levine v Stellar 341, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05299
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss because the plaintiffs sufficiently alleged facts supporting claims for adverse possession and the doctrine of practical location. The evidence submitted by the defendant did not constitute documentary evidence sufficient to utterly refute the plaintiffs’ factual allegations.
- Lenihan v Muhametja2026 NY Slip Op 05298
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the fraud claim, finding that triable issues of fact existed regarding whether the defendants actively concealed property defects. The court affirmed the dismissal of the breach of contract claim because the plaintiffs failed to identify any contractual provision that survived the merger of the deed.
- Lawless v LIDL US, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05297
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s personal injury claim, finding that the defendants established the hazardous condition was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous. The court determined that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the visibility and danger of the wooden pallet.
- King v Kohn2026 NY Slip Op 05296
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims against defendant Gluck, holding that the fraud allegations were duplicative of the breach of contract claims and that civil conspiracy is not an independent cause of action. Additionally, the court affirmed the vacatur of the notice of pendency because the complaint did not seek relief affecting title or possession of real property.
- Khodjaeva v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05295
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiffs established a prima facie case of liability in a chain-collision accident by demonstrating their vehicle was stopped when struck from behind. The court held that the defendants failed to provide a nonnegligent explanation for the collision or evidence supporting their affirmative defenses of comparative negligence and assumption of risk.
- Joseph Onorato, M.D., P.C. v Bruck2026 NY Slip Op 05294
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s judgment, holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment because the defendants, as policyholders, did not assign their rights to the demutualization proceeds. The court further granted the defendants’ cross-motion for summary judgment, declaring that the plaintiff is not entitled to the proceeds from the insurance company’s conversion to a stock company.
- Jones v New York City Hous. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05293
The court reversed the dismissal of the complaint because the defendant failed to reschedule the oral examination after the plaintiff’s counsel postponed it indefinitely. Under General Municipal Law § 50-h, the municipality has an obligation to reschedule the examination for the earliest possible date if it is postponed beyond the ninety-day period.
- Jacobs v March Constr./Consulting2026 NY Slip Op 05292
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on Labor Law § 240(1) and § 241(6) claims because the defendants raised triable issues of fact regarding whether the plaintiff’s conduct was the sole proximate cause of her injuries. The court found that evidence of a marked, secured cover and instructions not to touch construction material were sufficient to defeat the plaintiff’s prima facie showing of liability.
- HSBC Bank USA, National Association, etc., v Joslet Foster, et al., defendants, CitiMortgage, Inc., respondent2026 NY Slip Op 05291
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against CitiMortgage as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c) because the plaintiff failed to show sufficient cause for the delay in seeking a default judgment. The court found that the plaintiff’s explanations regarding stays and separate litigation were insufficient to account for years of inactivity.
- Houghton v Piperaro2026 NY Slip Op 05290
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order granting defendants’ motions to preclude evidence under CPLR 3126. The court held that the defendants failed to make a clear showing that the plaintiffs’ failure to comply with discovery demands was willful or contumacious.
- Hassane v Elbakry2026 NY Slip Op 05289
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to the defendant because the defendant failed to meet the prima facie burden of showing the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d). Additionally, the court denied the plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on liability on the merits, finding that triable issues of fact remained regarding the cause of the accident and the applicability of the emergency doctrine.
- J. H., etc., et al., appellants, v South Country Central School District, et al., respondents.2026 NY Slip Op 05288
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the complaint, holding that the school district provided adequate supervision and that the injury was not proximately caused by any lack of supervision. The court determined that the accident occurred in such a short span of time that even intense supervision could not have prevented it.
- Savannah Grey v William J. Grey, Sr.2026 NY Slip Op 05287
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff’s causes of action sufficiently stated viable claims for common-law intentional torts. The court determined that the allegations, liberally construed, fit within cognizable legal theories for sexual abuse, sexual assault, assault, and battery.
- Greene v Five Towns Premier Rehabilitation & Nursing Ctr.2026 NY Slip Op 05286
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order dismissing the complaint with prejudice, holding that a dismissal for lack of capacity to sue does not preclude the plaintiff from utilizing the six-month savings period under CPLR 205(a). The court determined that there is no restriction on the number of times a plaintiff may qualify for this statutory grace period when the prior dismissal was based solely on the failure to obtain letters of administration.
- Grannum v Tanais’s Deli Grocery Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05285
The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment because she failed to establish prima facie that the property owner had actual or constructive notice of the sidewalk defect. The expert’s reliance on Google Maps images without visiting the site was deemed insufficient to demonstrate constructive notice.
- Ford v Montclair Care Ctr., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05284
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of a motion to dismiss, granting the defendants’ motion under CPLR 3211(a). The court held that the defendants were immune from liability under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act because they provided health care services in good faith in response to the COVID-19 outbreak.
- Foley v Foley2026 NY Slip Op 05283
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order holding the defendants in civil contempt for failing to pay a distributive award, as the defendants failed to refute the plaintiff’s showing of noncompliance with a clear and unequivocal mandate. The court declined to consider issues raised on the appeal that could have been raised in a previously dismissed cross-appeal.
- Fata v Garnet Health Med. Ctr.2026 NY Slip Op 05282
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s intentional infliction of emotional distress claim because the alleged conduct did not meet the legal standard for extreme and outrageous behavior. The court determined that the conduct was not so egregious as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency in a civilized community.
- Estate of Vivien Boninti, etc., appellant, v South Shore Rehabilitation, LLC, etc., respondent, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 05281
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims, holding that the defendant failed to conclusively establish that the conditions for immunity under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act were satisfied. The court determined that the defendant’s submissions, which lacked evidence regarding the specific treatment of the decedent, were insufficient to warrant dismissal on the law.
- Ditech Financial, LLC v Rapuzzi2026 NY Slip Op 05280
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action because the plaintiff failed to strictly comply with RPAPL 1304 by mailing the required notice less than 90 days before commencing the action. The defendant’s cross-appeal was dismissed because he was not aggrieved by the order that granted his motion for summary judgment.
- Ditech Financial, LLC v Epstein2026 NY Slip Op 05279
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the nonparty’s motion to vacate a prior order because the nonparty failed to demonstrate a basis for relief under CPLR 5015(a). Additionally, the nonparty did not provide evidence of fraud, mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect necessary to warrant vacatur in the interests of substantial justice.
- Ditech Fin., LLC v Epstein2026 NY Slip Op 05278
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action because the statute of limitations had expired, as the discontinuance of a prior 2007 action did not de-accelerate the mortgage debt. The court held that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) was properly applied retroactively to bar the claim.
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v Han Yang Cho2026 NY Slip Op 05277
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to vacate a sua sponte dismissal order, finding that the dismissal was improper and that the plaintiff was not required to move for leave to renew. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion for leave to enter a default judgment and an order of reference, as the plaintiff made the requisite showing and the defendant’s opposition was insufficient to defeat the presumption of proper service.
- Cywiak v Packman2026 NY Slip Op 05276
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the divorce complaint because a prior stipulation filed with the court constituted documentary evidence that utterly refuted the plaintiff’s allegation of a valid marriage. The court further held that the plaintiff failed to establish any basis to vacate the stipulation.
- Cruz v 2742 Fulton, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05275
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the defendant because it failed to establish ownership, occupancy, control, or special use of the property. The defendant demonstrated that it did not own the abutting property and did not cause the sidewalk defect through its construction activities.
- Conti v Marino2026 NY Slip Op 05274
The court affirmed the dismissal of fraud claims as time-barred because the plaintiff failed to commence the action within the statutory limitations period. Additionally, the court affirmed the dismissal of quiet title claims based on the plaintiff’s failure to raise the standing argument in the main brief.
- Cole v Shorter2026 NY Slip Op 05273
The court reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the complaint, holding that the defendant’s conclusory and unsubstantiated affidavit denying residence at the service address was insufficient to rebut the presumption of proper service established by the process server’s affidavit. Consequently, the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction was properly denied.
- Clarke v Spino2026 NY Slip Op 05272
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims for specific performance and breach of contract, finding that the documentary evidence conclusively established that the sellers were ready, willing, and able to perform. The court further held that the plaintiffs were not entitled to a return of their down payment, which was properly released to the sellers as liquidated damages.
- Civetta Mechanical, LLC v AWL Industries, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05271
The court affirmed the denial of dismissal for breach of contract and implied covenant claims, finding sufficient allegations of mutual assent. However, it reversed the denial of dismissal for unjust enrichment, third-party beneficiary, and General Municipal Law § 101(5) claims, finding them legally insufficient.
- Brandford v Brandford2026 NY Slip Op 05270
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order holding the plaintiff in civil contempt for willfully failing to pay child support arrears and an equitable distribution award. The court found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate financial inability to comply with the court orders, thereby justifying the contempt findings and associated incarceration directives.
- Branch v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05269
The court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the abutting property owners because they had no duty to maintain the city-owned tree well. The defendants successfully demonstrated they did not create the dangerous condition, negligently repair the area, or cause the condition through special use.
- Blade Funding, LLC v Build Retail, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05268
The court affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion to vacate a clerk’s judgment, finding that a minor error in the plaintiff’s name did not prejudice the defendants and that the court had subject matter jurisdiction under General Obligations Law § 5-1402. The court further held that the transaction constituted a purchase of future receivables rather than a usurious loan because repayment was contingent on the merchant’s receipts.
- Bellavia v Hoppenstein2026 NY Slip Op 05267
The court affirmed the denial of a motion to change venue because the defendant failed to demonstrate witness inconvenience, and it affirmed the dismissal of the defendant’s counterclaims for abuse of process, injunctive relief, and libel. Although the lower court improperly relied on a nonconforming affirmation, the dismissal was proper because the counterclaims failed to state causes of action.
- Bautista v Supervalu, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05266
The court affirmed the dismissal of the personal injury action, finding that the defendants established the hazardous condition was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous. The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact, as their expert’s opposition was deemed speculative and conclusory.
- Batista v Allerton Ave Estates, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05265
The defendants failed to demonstrate their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment because they did not eliminate triable issues of fact regarding whether the icy condition resulted from a prior storm or if the defendants had constructive notice of the pre-existing condition. Consequently, the lower court’s order granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint was reversed.
- Barnard v Barnard2026 NY Slip Op 05264
The judgment of divorce was modified to award the defendant a 50% share of the plaintiff’s savings and checking accounts and to delete the retroactive child support award pending recalculation with appropriate credits for mortgage payments. The appellate court affirmed the maintenance award and counsel fees as a provident exercise of discretion.
- Bank of New York Mellon, etc., respondent, v Patricia L. Conforti, etc., defendants, 35 Pleasure, LLC, appellant.2026 NY Slip Op 05262
The Appellate Division reversed the foreclosure judgment, holding that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) constituted a change in the law that allowed the defendant to renew its motion for summary judgment. The court determined that the voluntary discontinuance of a prior foreclosure action did not de-accelerate the mortgage debt under FAPA, rendering the current action untimely under the six-year statute of limitations.
- Alvarez v 100-10 67th Rd. Condominium2026 NY Slip Op 05261
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order by substituting an adverse inference charge for the preclusion of the defendants’ liability defense. The court found that while the defendants were negligent in failing to preserve surveillance video, the harsher sanction of precluding their defense was an improvident exercise of discretion.
- Alam v Uber Tech., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05260
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendant failed to establish that the plaintiff’s injuries were not caused by the accident. Consequently, the burden never shifted to the plaintiff to explain any gap in treatment, and triable issues of fact remained regarding serious injury.
- Abdelrahman v Stop & Shop Supermarket Co., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05259
The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint against all defendants because they established that no dangerous condition existed. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact, and his expert’s affidavit was deemed speculative and insufficient to defeat the motion.
- 90 Chicken Corp. v 90 Jericho Realty Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05258
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of specific performance and award of nominal damages, finding that the plaintiff failed to prove lost future profits with reasonable certainty. The court determined that the plaintiff did not demonstrate that the defendant was able to deliver the property or that there was no adequate remedy at law.
- Matter of Mitchell v NYC Bd. of Elections2026 NY Slip Op 05257
The court affirmed the denial of the petition to validate an independent nominating petition because the petitioner failed to strictly comply with Election Law § 6-140(1)(a) by omitting the name of the independent body. The court determined that this omission constituted a fundamental flaw rather than a de minimis scrivener’s error, rendering the petition invalid.
- Matter of Hansen v Suffolk County Bd. of Elections2026 NY Slip Op 05256
The hybrid proceeding and action were dismissed because the petitioner failed to institute the proceeding within the statutory time limitations set forth in Election Law article 16. The court found that the proceeding was not promptly instituted after the petitioner had notice of the Board’s determination invalidating the designating petition.
Week ending September 12, 2026
Browse the week ending September 12, 2026
- Matter of Ramos v Barravecchio2026 NY Slip Op 05255
The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s denial of the motion to dismiss the petition, finding that the failure to verify the petition was not a basis for dismissal because the respondent failed to give notice with due diligence regarding the defect. Additionally, the court noted that there was no allegation that any substantial right would be prejudiced by the allegedly defective verification.
Week ending September 5, 2026
Browse the week ending September 5, 2026
- People ex rel. Florez v Commissioner of N.Y. City Dept. of Corr.2026 NY Slip Op 05215
The court sustained the writ of habeas corpus, directing the immediate release of the petitioner upon the posting of bail in the sum of $500,000, $750,000, or $250,000. The release is conditioned on the petitioner wearing an electronic monitoring bracelet, remaining confined to his residence except for specific visits, and surrendering all passports.
- Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB v Schwartz2026 NY Slip Op 05214
The defendants, who were not parties to the underlying note or mortgage, lacked standing to raise the plaintiff’s alleged failure to serve a notice of default as a defense. The plaintiff established its standing to foreclose by submitting a copy of the note, endorsed in blank, annexed to the complaint at the time the action was commenced.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, etc., v Nina Fischman, et al.2026 NY Slip Op 05212
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment of foreclosure and sale because the plaintiff’s RPAPL 1304 notice, issued before a statutory amendment, failed to satisfy the condition precedent for commencing the action after the amendment’s effective date. Consequently, the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and to strike the affirmative defense regarding non-compliance with RPAPL 1304 was denied.
- Velasquez v Kelly2026 NY Slip Op 05211
The appellate court dismissed the third-party defendant’s appeal for lack of standing and modified the lower court’s order to vacate the conditional striking of the defendant’s answer. The court determined that the defendant complied with the discovery order by demonstrating the requested footage did not exist and that he had a potentially meritorious defense.
- Vaynman v 3 Kings Point Realty, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05210
The Appellate Division dismissed the appeal regarding the denial of reargument but modified the lower court’s order to grant the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the defendants’ second, third, and fifth counterclaims. The court found that the counterclaims for defamation, tortious interference, and common-law indemnification failed to meet the required pleading standards for specificity and factual allegations.
- U.S. Bank, N.A. v Ifemesia2026 NY Slip Op 05209
The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s motion to stay the foreclosure sale because the plaintiff’s delay was excused under CPLR 2004. Additionally, the court correctly denied the motion to toll interest accrual as the defendant failed to demonstrate wrongful conduct by the plaintiff.
- Tenezaca v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05208
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to deem a late notice of claim timely served, finding that the medical records provided the defendant with actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim. Consequently, the dismissal of the complaint for failure to serve a timely notice of claim was also reversed.
- Suffolk County Pub. Admr. v Davin’s Funeral Home, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05207
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal, holding that the plaintiff’s new action was timely commenced under the savings provision of CPLR 205(a). The court determined that the prior action terminated in April 2023, and the new action was commenced and served within the required six-month period.
- Sofra Mediterranean Grill, Ltd. v Chebli2026 NY Slip Op 05206
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order striking the defendant’s answer and third-party complaint, as well as the plaintiff’s amended complaint and the third-party defendants’ answer, due to willful and contumacious conduct. The court found that both sides demonstrated repeated failures to comply with court-ordered discovery demands and deposition schedules, justifying the severe sanctions under CPLR 3126.
- Simon v Plainview Ave. Assoc.2026 NY Slip Op 05205
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff’s testimony raised triable issues of fact regarding whether the forklift was an open and obvious hazard. The court determined that the forklift’s location in the aisle, which prevented the plaintiff from positioning his cart, created a potentially inherently dangerous condition.
- Scopinich v Brookhaven Mem. Hosp. Med. Ctr., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05204
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, granting dismissal of the medical malpractice, wrongful death, negligence, and Public Health Law § 2801-d claims against the defendant. The defendant met its prima facie burden by showing no departure from accepted practice or regulatory violations, while the plaintiff’s expert testimony was deemed conclusory and insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact.
- Schwartz v Goldstein2026 NY Slip Op 05203
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims for conversion and breach of fiduciary duty, finding that the defendant, as successor trustee, rightfully possessed the sale proceeds and the plaintiffs lacked a superior ownership interest. Additionally, the court denied the plaintiffs’ cross-motion to amend the complaint to add their mother as a plaintiff because the proposed amendment was patently devoid of merit.
- Santostefano v Zabell2026 NY Slip Op 05202
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the legal malpractice complaint because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate actual and ascertainable damages resulting from the attorneys’ alleged negligence. The court further held that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the claim of violation of Judiciary Law § 487.
- Ramos v 126th St. Equities, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05201
The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s order striking a notice to admit because it improperly sought admissions of legal conclusions or fundamental material issues. The court held that such matters are not suitable for a notice to admit and can be addressed through other discovery devices like depositions.
- Pitt v Rosenblatt2026 NY Slip Op 05200
The court affirmed the denial of judgment as a matter of law but reversed the denial of a motion to set aside the verdict as against the weight of the evidence. The jury’s answers were irreconcilably inconsistent because they found no sudden medical emergency occurred while simultaneously finding the driver was not negligent.
- People v Zaman2026 NY Slip Op 05199
The court affirmed the judgment, finding the guilty plea was valid and the sentence not excessive, but determined that the defendant’s appeal waiver was ineffective because the trial court mischaracterized the right to appeal. Consequently, the appellate court reviewed the excessive sentence claim on the merits despite the purported waiver.
- People v Williams2026 NY Slip Op 05198
The court affirmed the convictions for assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court also held that the trial court properly disqualified defense counsel due to a potential conflict of interest and correctly limited the jury instruction to the justification of deadly physical force.
- People v Truell2026 NY Slip Op 05197
The court affirmed the conviction for robbery in the first degree, finding that probable cause existed for the arrest and that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless search of a backpack. The court also determined that the admission of Molineux evidence was proper and any error was harmless, while rejecting claims of prosecutorial misconduct and ineffective assistance of counsel.
- People v Merino2026 NY Slip Op 05196
CPL 420.45 applies to instruments containing false statements or information, not just forged signatures, allowing a court to declare a deed void ab initio following a conviction for offering a false instrument for filing. The statutory presumption that the instrument is void ab initio was not rebutted by the appellant’s evidence regarding the familial relationship or notarization.
- People v Huff2026 NY Slip Op 05195
The court affirmed the conviction for conspiracy in the fourth degree, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The admission of gang affiliation evidence was upheld as probative of motive and relationships, with any prejudice minimized by limiting instructions.
- People v Franco-Martinez2026 NY Slip Op 05194
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that pre-Miranda questioning regarding the defendant’s physical condition fell within the pedigree exception and did not invalidate the subsequent waiver. The court further found the evidence legally sufficient to establish intent to kill and that the jury’s rejection of the extreme emotional disturbance defense was not against the weight of the evidence.
- People v Deleon2026 NY Slip Op 05193
The court affirmed the judgment of conviction, determining that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence based on witness identifications and the defendant’s statement. The court declined to review the ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal, directing that it be raised in a CPL 440.10 proceeding.
- People v Crisp2026 NY Slip Op 05192
The judgment of conviction is affirmed because the defendant failed to preserve his claims of unfair trial and ineffective assistance of counsel for appellate review. Additionally, the court granted the People’s motion to strike portions of the defendant’s reply brief that raised new arguments for the first time.
- People ex rel. Liles v Richards2026 NY Slip Op 05191
The court held that the 90-day readiness clock under CPL 30.30(2)(a) only includes the actual periods of time a defendant spends in custody, excluding any time spent out on bail. Consequently, the defendant was not entitled to release because the total time chargeable to the People was less than 90 days.
- O’Connor v Long Is. Jewish Med. Ctr.2026 NY Slip Op 05190
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to vacate a summary judgment order, finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a potentially meritorious opposition. The court determined that the plaintiff did not submit a non-conclusory expert opinion that specifically addressed the defense expert’s assertions regarding the standard of care for fall prevention.
- Nouveau Elevator Industries, LLC v Eli Inzlicht Sprei2026 NY Slip Op 05189
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, finding that the process server’s affidavit established a presumption of proper service that the defendant failed to rebut. Additionally, the defendant did not demonstrate a reasonable excuse for his default, rendering it unnecessary to consider whether he had a meritorious defense.
- Newman v Eshghi2026 NY Slip Op 05188
The court dismissed the appeal regarding evidentiary rulings as not appealable and granted leave to appeal the statute of limitations ruling, deeming it an application for leave to appeal. The court affirmed the lower court’s denial of the motion in limine, holding that it was an inappropriate substitute for a motion for summary judgment without a showing of newly discovered evidence.
- Matter of Starna v New York City Fire Dept.2026 NY Slip Op 05187
The Appellate Division reversed the money judgment awarding attorneys’ fees because such fees are not recoverable in CPLR article 78 proceedings unless authorized by agreement, statute, or court rule. The court determined that the lower court improperly awarded fees in the absence of such authorization.
- Matter of Kupi v Schroeder2026 NY Slip Op 05186
The court confirmed the Department of Motor Vehicles’ determination to revoke the petitioner’s driver license, finding that the administrative record contained substantial evidence supporting the finding that the petitioner refused to submit to a chemical test. The court held that the reviewing court could not substitute its judgment for that of the agency because the evidence, including officer testimony and the petitioner’s failure to testify, demonstrated reasonable grounds for the arrest and the refusal.
- Matter of Fried v Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 05185
The amendments to the Rent Stabilization Law enacted by the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 apply to pending holdover proceedings where the landlord had not yet obtained a judgment of possession. Consequently, the landlord was not entitled to recover the unit for personal use, and the tenants were entitled to dismissal of the petition.
- Matter of Douglass2026 NY Slip Op 05184
The court confirmed the Special Referee’s report sustaining all eight charges of professional misconduct against the respondent. The court imposed a one-year suspension from the practice of law, citing the respondent’s failure to supervise nonlawyers, discourteous conduct before a tribunal, and violation of a protective order.
- Matter of Ceasar v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys.2026 NY Slip Op 05183
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s award of attorneys’ fees because such awards in CPLR article 78 proceedings require authorization by agreement, statute, or court rule. Additionally, the court found that any sanction for frivolous conduct was improper because the respondents were not afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard before the sanctions were imposed.
- Matter of Caceres v NYC Health & Hosps.2026 NY Slip Op 05182
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim, finding that the petitioners established a reasonable excuse for the delay due to the infant’s medical condition and that the public corporation was not prejudiced. The proposed notice of claim was deemed served nunc pro tunc.
- Matter of C & L Concrete Corp. v Shawmut Woodworking & Supply, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05181
The court affirmed the permanent stay of arbitration because the contract between the parties did not affirmatively establish an express agreement to arbitrate their disputes. Furthermore, the contractual provision allowing one party to submit matters to arbitration in a jurisdiction of its choosing was deemed void under General Business Law § 757[1].
- Matter of 826 Marcy Ave., LLC v State of N.Y. Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal2026 NY Slip Op 05180
The court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the CPLR article 78 proceeding, finding that the DHCR’s denial of the rent stabilization exemption was supported by a rational basis. The agency’s determination was not arbitrary and capricious because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the building was substantially rehabilitated as required by the operational bulletin.
- Morgan v McLeod2026 NY Slip Op 05179
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to extend the time to serve the summons and complaint. The court found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate reasonable diligence in attempting service or that an extension was warranted in the interest of justice.
- Mohamad v Csompo2026 NY Slip Op 05178
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendants’ expert failed to address conflicting evidence regarding the application of fundal pressure during delivery. Consequently, the defendants did not make a prima facie showing that they adhered to accepted medical practice or that their actions were not the proximate cause of the child’s injuries.
- Lynch v Partelow2026 NY Slip Op 05177
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the complaint because the defendant established prima facie that the decedent’s negligent operation was the sole proximate cause of the accident. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the motion.
- Lopez-Martinez v Leroux2026 NY Slip Op 05176
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to lift a stay, finding that the prior dismissal order only applied to the decedent’s claim. The court held that the defendants failed to establish that the action was dismissed in its entirety, requiring a remittal for a determination on the merits of the surviving plaintiff’s motion.
- Lewis v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05175
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order compelling the production of the driver’s personnel file and policy manuals, finding them irrelevant under respondeat superior. It also modified the order to deny the plaintiff’s motion to compel additional depositions, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that existing witnesses were inadequate or that new witnesses possessed material information.
- Kept Realty, LLC v Meir Miller, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05174
The court modified the lower court’s order to deny the plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment because the lease provisions regarding the renewal option were ambiguous and triable issues of fact existed. Specifically, it was unclear whether the tenant was in default beyond the cure period and whether timely written notice of the option’s exercise was provided.
- Jacobs v Arlington Owners Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05173
The court affirmed the dismissal of the breach of contract and implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing claims because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the defendant breached any specific provision of the terms of sale. The terms of sale did not obligate the defendant to assist the plaintiff with financing or allow access for an appraisal, and the implied covenant cannot create obligations inconsistent with the contract’s plain terms.
- HSBC Bank USA, National Association, etc., v Joy Wharton, etc., et al., defendants; Property 1501, LLC, nonparty-respondent2026 NY Slip Op 05172
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against Joy Wharton as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c) due to the plaintiff’s failure to move for default judgment within one year. However, the court reversed the dismissal of the complaint against the remaining defendants under CPLR 306-b because the nonparty movant lacked standing as a successor in interest to those specific defendants.
- Hampshire Recreation, LLC v Village of Mamaroneck2026 NY Slip Op 05171
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order compelling the defendants to comply with discovery demands in a regulatory taking action. The court determined that the requested materials were reasonably calculated to yield information material and necessary to the prosecution of the action, specifically regarding investment-backed expectations and the character of government action.
- Graudins v Hunt2026 NY Slip Op 05168
The defendant lacked standing to enforce a stipulation requiring the decedent to maintain life insurance because the children, not the defendant, were the intended beneficiaries. Consequently, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant’s cross-motion to recover the policy value from the decedent’s estate.
- Gooding v Bank of N.Y. Mellon2026 NY Slip Op 05167
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s quiet title action because she failed to establish that her possession of the property was hostile or under a claim of right. The evidence showed the plaintiff was a nominal owner under an agreement with the title holder, which negated the requisite hostile intent for adverse possession.
- Garanin v Bykhovsky2026 NY Slip Op 05166
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim for wrongful eviction under RPAPL 853 because he failed to establish that he was in actual physical possession of the property. The plaintiff voluntarily moved to a side unit and only visited the main part of the home to see his children, not to occupy it.
- Federal National Mortgage Association v Gooch2026 NY Slip Op 05165
The foreclosure action was a legal nullity because it was commenced against a deceased mortgagor rather than her estate’s personal representative. Subsequent amendments to substitute heirs or add defendants did not cure the jurisdictional defect or effectuate jurisdiction over the estate.
- Druzhinsky v Trump Vil. Section 4, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05164
The plaintiff breached the contract by failing to submit a complete application package within the required five-day period, entitling the defendant to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendant, as the prevailing party, is also entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to the terms of sale.
- Digangi v New York City Sch. Constr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05162
The court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 240(1) claim because the three-foot fall did not present a significant elevation-related risk, and modified the order to dismiss the Labor Law § 241(6) claims predicated on specific Industrial Code provisions and OSHA regulations. The court denied summary judgment on the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims, finding triable issues of fact regarding the defendants’ notice of the icy condition.
- Deluca v Golden Gate Rehabilitation & Health Care Ctr., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05161
The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the medical malpractice and Public Health Law § 2801-d claims because the defendant established no departure from the standard of care and the plaintiff’s expert failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The plaintiff’s opposition was deemed speculative and conclusory, failing to rebut the specific assertions of the defendant’s expert.
- Cox v Cove 5, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05160
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the tenant, Dublin Deck, Inc., as it established it did not own, occupy, or control the parking lot. However, the court reversed the dismissal against the property owners, Cove 5, LLC, and Leeward 5, Inc., because they failed to establish that the railroad tie was an open and obvious condition that was not inherently dangerous.
- Compensation Guidance, Inc. v Aspro Plumbing, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05159
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims because the plaintiff was not licensed as an insurance consultant in New York. Consequently, the contract was deemed unenforceable, and the plaintiff could not recover fees for services rendered.
- Cohen v A 2019 Nissan2026 NY Slip Op 05158
The court affirmed the judgment directing the forfeiture of the vehicle, holding that the defendant’s challenges to the post-seizure hearing procedures were rendered academic by his stipulation to return the vehicle. The court further held that Suffolk County’s civil forfeiture statute was not preempted by state law and that the forfeiture did not constitute an excessive fine under the State and Federal Constitutions.
- Carey v State of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05157
The State of New York has no duty to ensure the safety of areas of a roadway that are not intersections or designated crosswalks where pedestrian presence is not foreseeable. Consequently, the Court of Claims properly granted summary judgment dismissing the claimant’s personal injury claim.
- Breslin Brookhaven, LLC v Rose2026 NY Slip Op 05156
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to grant the defendants’ motion to compel arbitration, finding that the arbitration clause was broad enough to cover the dispute and that the nonsignatory defendant was entitled to enforce it as an assignee. The court further held that the defendants did not waive their right to arbitrate by litigating a separate action.
- Boutureira v Grotas2026 NY Slip Op 05155
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to deny summary judgment on the medical malpractice and lack of informed consent claims related to the plication surgery. The court found that the defendants failed to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law because triable issues of fact remained regarding the acute phase of the plaintiff’s condition and the adequacy of informed consent.
- Board of Educ. of the Lawrence Union Free Sch. Dist. v Incorporated Vil. of Cedarhurst2026 NY Slip Op 05154
The petitioners lacked standing to challenge the village’s SEQRA determination because their alleged injuries were either economic, shared by the public at large, or too speculative. Consequently, the lower court’s dismissal of the petition was affirmed, though the procedural mechanism was corrected to a declaratory judgment.
- A.L.A.C. Contracting Corp. v State of New York-Department of Transportation2026 NY Slip Op 05152
The Court of Claims properly granted summary judgment dismissing the claim because the claimant failed to strictly comply with the contract’s condition precedent notice and record-keeping requirements. The claimant’s notice was untimely, and failure to literally perform these express conditions constituted a waiver of the claim for additional compensation.
- 11-36 31st Ave. Lender, LLC v RM Newman, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05151
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment regarding the deficiency judgment because the plaintiff’s electronic filing of motion papers did not constitute proper service under RPAPL 1371(2). Consequently, the failure to provide proper notice served as a complete bar to the entry of the deficiency judgment.
Also decided
- People v Rosario 2026 NY Slip Op 05559 September 30, 2026
- People v McCall 2026 NY Slip Op 05555 September 30, 2026
- People v Clarke 2026 NY Slip Op 05552 September 30, 2026
- People v Carlson 2026 NY Slip Op 05551 September 30, 2026
- People v Callahan 2026 NY Slip Op 05550 September 30, 2026
- People v Brown 2026 NY Slip Op 05549 September 30, 2026
- Matter of Zhang v Feiner 2026 NY Slip Op 05545 September 30, 2026
- Matter of Antonio T. 2026 NY Slip Op 05542 September 30, 2026
- Matter of Jennine E. v Derrick W.T. 2026 NY Slip Op 05528 September 30, 2026
- Infante v Manolarakis 2026 NY Slip Op 05522 September 30, 2026
- Herrera v Almonte-Hernandez 2026 NY Slip Op 05521 September 30, 2026
- Almonte v Raymours Furniture Co., Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 05509 September 30, 2026
- People ex rel. Harnick v Spano 2026 NY Slip Op 05461 September 25, 2026
- Saintvilus v Hall 2026 NY Slip Op 05433 September 23, 2026
- People v De La Cruz 2026 NY Slip Op 05428 September 23, 2026
- People v Ward 2026 NY Slip Op 05427 September 23, 2026
- People v Walker 2026 NY Slip Op 05426 September 23, 2026
- People v Thompson 2026 NY Slip Op 05424 September 23, 2026
- People v Stedman 2026 NY Slip Op 05423 September 23, 2026
- People v Smith 2026 NY Slip Op 05422 September 23, 2026
- People v Ruiz 2026 NY Slip Op 05421 September 23, 2026
- People v Rivera 2026 NY Slip Op 05419 September 23, 2026
- People v Ricks 2026 NY Slip Op 05418 September 23, 2026
- People v Nelson 2026 NY Slip Op 05416 September 23, 2026
- People v Locus 2026 NY Slip Op 05413 September 23, 2026
- People v Kennedy 2026 NY Slip Op 05412 September 23, 2026
- People v Jacobs 2026 NY Slip Op 05411 September 23, 2026
- People v Heath 2026 NY Slip Op 05410 September 23, 2026
- People v Cuebas 2026 NY Slip Op 05409 September 23, 2026
- People v Campbell 2026 NY Slip Op 05408 September 23, 2026
- NewRez, LLC v Shannon 2026 NY Slip Op 05407 September 23, 2026
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. 2026 NY Slip Op 05394 September 23, 2026
- Matter of Chambers v Straw 2026 NY Slip Op 05391 September 23, 2026
- Guthrie v New York-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital 2026 NY Slip Op 05383 September 23, 2026
- DBW TL HOLDCO 2014, LLC v Kirk 2026 NY Slip Op 05380 September 23, 2026
- 1539 Realty, LLC v Murphy 2026 NY Slip Op 05376 September 23, 2026
- People ex rel. Scaggs v Spano 2026 NY Slip Op 05375 September 22, 2026
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v Nii Badu Kotei 2026 NY Slip Op 05344 September 16, 2026
- NYCTL 2011-A Trust v 249 Brighton Corp. 2026 NY Slip Op 05320 September 16, 2026
- Bank of New York Mellon v Pryce 2026 NY Slip Op 05263 September 16, 2026
- People ex rel. Elman v Richards 2026 NY Slip Op 05354 September 16, 2026
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB v Schwartz 2026 NY Slip Op 05213 September 2, 2026
- Hampshire Recreation, LLC v Village of Mamaroneck 2026 NY Slip Op 05169 September 2, 2026
- Druzhinsky v Trump Vil. Section 4, Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 05163 September 2, 2026
- Aurora Loan Services, LLC v Miller 2026 NY Slip Op 05153 September 2, 2026