New York Law Watch
Decisions filed in October 2026
For October 2026, Law Watch lists 630 indexable decisions dated October 1, 2026 to October 29, 2026 across 5 decision weeks.
853 decision records: 630 meet the substance floor; 223 records are held from search listings.
Every decision that passed Law Watch’s clean-text gates in October 2026, from the official reporter. Decisions that do not meet the substance floor are listed but not indexed.
October 29, 2026
- People v Nantan2026 NY Slip Op 06379
CPL 30.30 (6) unambiguously expands appellate review of speedy trial claims to all cases, including those arising from guilty pleas entered before the statute’s effective date. The provision applies to appeals pending when it took effect because it is a procedural and remedial statute that mandates review without reservation.
- People v Ekukpe2026 NY Slip Op 06378
CPL 30.30 (6) does not preclude a criminal defendant from waiving the right to appeal a statutory speedy trial claim as part of a negotiated plea bargain. The statute’s plain text only abrogates the rule that a guilty plea forfeits such claims, but it does not address or prohibit appeal waivers.
- JRT Realty Group, Inc. v Cushman & Wakefield, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06400
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims, holding that the defamation and tortious interference claims were barred by New York’s anti-SLAPP statute because the underlying email addressed a public interest issue. Additionally, the court found the plaintiff lacked standing to enforce the contract and failed to meet the heightened substantial-basis standard required for anti-SLAPP motions.
- Ann Arbor Group LLC v Gherardi2026 NY Slip Op 06399
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s CPLR 3213 motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint because the service of the notice of motion was defective, depriving the court of jurisdiction. Additionally, the court found that even if jurisdiction existed, the plaintiff failed to establish entitlement to summary judgment due to unresolved questions of fact regarding the assignment of the note and guaranty.
- Whitaker v 1975-1983 Jerome Ave. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06398
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment because the motion was untimely and lacked a meritorious defense. The court also declined to review a service argument raised for the first time on appeal.
- Matter of B.B.V. v D.S.S., Jr., et al.2026 NY Slip Op 06397
The Family Court properly dismissed the custody petition filed by the biological mother for lack of standing. The court determined that the mother lacked standing because the child had already been placed in the care and custody of the Commissioner of Social Services for adoption purposes prior to the filing of the petition.
- Topilin v Island House Tenant Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06396
The court reinstated the plaintiff’s claim for breach of the warranty of habitability, holding that a tenant’s failure to procure required insurance does not waive statutory rights under Real Property Law § 235-b. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims for breach of the proprietary lease and against the lender, finding the lease terms and loan documents governed those disputes.
- Schuster v Deckoff2026 NY Slip Op 06395
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s personal injury action for lack of personal jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to establish proper substituted service. Additionally, the court denied the plaintiff’s cross-motion for an extension of time to serve the pleadings due to a lack of reasonably diligent efforts.
- Matter of Progressive Direct Insurance Company v Wilmar Cifuentes Vargas2026 NY Slip Op 06393
The Appellate Division reversed the permanent stay of arbitration, remanding the matter for a hearing to determine if physical contact occurred and if the 24-hour reporting requirement was met. The court found that conflicting evidence regarding the accident and the reporting compliance necessitated a framed issue hearing rather than a definitive stay.
- Peru v Peru2026 NY Slip Op 06392
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s award of sole legal and primary physical custody to the mother, finding that the father’s refusal to accept the child’s autism diagnosis and his failure to provide a realistic educational plan were detrimental to the child’s best interests. The court determined that joint custody was inappropriate due to the acrimonious relationship between the parties and the father’s undermining behavior.
- People v Rodriguez2026 NY Slip Op 06391
The court affirmed the judgment, finding that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea. The court also determined that the defendant’s claims regarding the waiver of self-incrimination and speedy trial rights were unpreserved for appellate review.
- People v Campbell2026 NY Slip Op 06390
The court vacated the specific expiration date of the order of protection because it was calculated without accounting for the defendant’s jail time credit. The matter was remanded for a new determination of the order’s expiration, while the protection itself remained in effect pending that decision.
- People v Feldman2026 NY Slip Op 06389
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding that police had reasonable suspicion to stop the defendant and probable cause to arrest him after he pushed a detective and open warrants were discovered. The court also rejected the defendant’s Batson challenge and his CPL 440.20 motion to set aside the sentence based on recent federal precedent.
- Matter of Peers Business Inc. v Navios S. Am. Logistics Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06387
The court reversed the lower court’s order continuing a temporary restraining order and dissolved the TRO because the petitioner participated in the arbitration proceedings, thereby waiving its right to seek a stay under CPLR 7503(b). The court held that the petitioner’s failure to seek judicial relief promptly, despite advice from a federal court, precluded it from avoiding arbitration.
- Matter of Wolk2026 NY Slip Op 06385
The court granted the Attorney Grievance Committee’s motion for interim suspension, finding that uncontroverted evidence of the attorney’s misappropriation of client funds and misrepresentations to the court constituted conduct immediately threatening the public interest. The attorney’s claimed good faith belief in his right to the funds did not controvert the bank records showing the funds were removed from the IOLA account while the dispute remained unresolved.
- Hofstra University, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Respondents, v United Educators, Defendant-Respondent-Appellant.2026 NY Slip Op 06384
The term ‘funds’ in the insurance policy exclusion includes tuition and fees, but dismissal of the complaint is premature because the underlying class actions seek damages beyond the return of money paid. The insurer’s duty to pay defense costs is triggered because the underlying claims raise the possibility of coverage for other damages.
- Matter of Connolly v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06383
The court affirmed the denial of leave to file a late notice of claim because the petitioner failed to prove the City had actual knowledge of the essential facts of his claim or that the City was not prejudiced by the delay. Additionally, the petitioner failed to provide a reasonable excuse for the delay, as his claim of incapacity was contradicted by his own affidavit.
- Brigade Cavalry Fund Ltd. v Chirico2026 NY Slip Op 06382
The court dismissed the fraud claims based on financial projections due to a lack of justifiable reliance and adequate due diligence by the sophisticated investor. Additionally, the North Carolina Securities Act claim was dismissed to the extent it relied on financial projections, while the officer’s certificate claim failed for lack of sufficient scienter allegations.
- 901 Properties, LLC v Bear Glass Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06380
The trial court properly excluded nonparty invoices from evidence because the plaintiff failed to provide supportive testimony regarding the nonparty’s business practices. Additionally, the court correctly found that the contract did not cover all windows, entitling the defendant to payment for the extra work performed.
- Matter of Treseder2026 NY Slip Op 06376
The court granted the attorney’s application for permission to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. Consequently, her name was stricken from the roll of attorneys and she was commanded to desist from the practice of law in the state.
- Matter of Tingwei2026 NY Slip Op 06374
The court suspended the respondent for three years, finding that her federal felony conviction for health care fraud constituted a serious crime that raised grave concerns about her character and fitness to practice law. The court rejected arguments that the misconduct was less significant because it occurred prior to admission or outside the practice of law, emphasizing the need to protect the public and maintain professional integrity.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Trustee, v Helena Laurino, Also Known as Helena T. Laurino, Appellant, et al., Defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06371
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of foreclosure and sale, finding no abuse of discretion in the lower court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment due to insufficient proof of a reasonable excuse. The court further upheld the confirmation of the referee’s report, rejecting the defendant’s challenges to the evidence and calculations as unsupported by admissible record evidence.
- Matter of Bruck v Town of Rochester Planning Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 06370
The Planning Board did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in granting site plan approval for a modified project because the changes were in substantial conformance with the original conceptual plan. The Board was authorized to adopt the Town Board’s parking determinations without referring the matter to the Zoning Board of Appeals or Code Enforcement Officer.
- Matter of McDonell v CJ Banach Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06369
The Board lacked discretion to excuse the carrier’s failure to serve the pre-hearing conference statement because the governing rule mandates waiver of defenses absent a showing of good cause and good faith. The carrier’s defenses were properly waived because it failed to provide the required affidavit demonstrating that the error was due to good cause and that it exercised due diligence.
- Matter of Andrew II. v Gail JJ.2026 NY Slip Op 06368
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order modifying custody to implement a graduated schedule for overnight visits and maintaining travel restrictions. The court found that the father’s inconsistent parenting and transportation issues provided a sound basis for requiring demonstrated reliability before expanding his access to the child.
- Seneca Lake Guardian, Inc. v Seneca Meadows, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06367
The court affirmed the dismissal of claims against the Department of Environmental Conservation, finding that the Green Amendment does not impose a ministerial duty to enforce regulations and that the request for an injunction was not ripe. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the public nuisance claim due to a lack of special injury but allowed the private nuisance claim to proceed.
- Seneca Ins. Co. Inc. v Cobleskill Enter., LLP2026 NY Slip Op 06366
The court granted summary judgment to the insurer, declaring it not obligated to cover the fire because the insured breached the policy’s protective safeguards endorsement by failing to maintain operational smoke detectors in common areas. The court also dismissed the insurer’s fraud and negligent misrepresentation claims against the broker, finding no fiduciary duty and unreasonable reliance, and dismissed the insured’s third-party claims against the broker as moot.
- Maisto v State of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06365
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s determination that the State’s remedial response, centered on the full implementation of the Foundation Aid formula, was rational. The court held that while plaintiffs identified legitimate concerns regarding the formula’s methodology, they failed to demonstrate that the State’s chosen remedy was patently irrational or constitutionally infirm.
- Cannabis Impact Prevention Coalition, LLC v New York State Cannabis Control Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 06364
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, holding that the state’s use of funds to finance cannabis dispensaries does not conflict with the federal Controlled Substances Act. The court determined that the state law does not create a physical impossibility of compliance with federal law nor obstruct Congress’s objectives, as it does not require individuals to engage in federally prohibited conduct.
- Matter of Jeffrey O. v Casey Q.2026 NY Slip Op 06363
The court affirmed the Family Court’s sua sponte dismissal of the violation petition, holding that the order was appealable as of right because it was dispositional. The dismissal was proper because the petition’s allegations were either moot, duplicative of pending matters, or failed to allege violations of the order of protection.
- Matter of Nin v Rosado2026 NY Slip Op 06362
The appeal was dismissed as moot because the passage of more than four years since the petitioner’s separation caused his basic training certification to expire by operation of law. Consequently, no relief could be granted to restore his certification or reinstate his status on the central registry.
- People v Albert D.2026 NY Slip Op 06361
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion for resentencing under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act because he failed to establish a temporal nexus between the childhood abuse he suffered and the offense committed decades later. Additionally, the court found that the alleged recent abuse by his spouse did not constitute substantial abuse as required by the statute.
- People v Hart2026 NY Slip Op 06360
The court held that the defendant’s kidnapping conviction merged with his assault conviction because the restraint and the underlying crime occurred simultaneously as part of a single, uninterrupted episode. Consequently, the kidnapping conviction was reversed and dismissed, while the remaining convictions and sentences were affirmed.
- People v Bradford2026 NY Slip Op 06359
The appellate court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding that the trial court properly admitted evidence to establish the time frames of the abuse and did not commit reversible error in limiting cross-examination regarding the victims’ credibility. The court further determined that the sentences were not unduly harsh and the orders of protection were appropriately issued.
- People v Franklin2026 NY Slip Op 06358
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the defendant’s constitutional challenge to his mandatory persistent violent felony offender status was unpreserved because he did not contest his criminal history during the plea colloquy. The court declined to exercise its interest of justice jurisdiction to review the unpreserved issue.
- People v Perry2026 NY Slip Op 06357
The court affirmed the conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, finding that the evidence of the defendant’s knowledge and control of the firearm was legally sufficient and supported by the weight of the evidence. The court also upheld the suppression court’s finding that police had reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle based on the defendant’s illegal U-turn and flight from the scene of a shooting.
- People v Smith2026 NY Slip Op 06356
The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions for attempted murder and robbery, finding the evidence sufficient in weight and rejecting the suppression of GPS ankle monitor data due to the parolee’s reduced expectation of privacy. However, the court vacated the conviction for attempted murder in the second degree as an inclusory concurrent count of the first-degree charge.
- People v Hampton2026 NY Slip Op 06355
The court held that the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because it did not clearly advise that the right to pursue collateral relief survived. Consequently, the court reviewed the sentence for severity but affirmed the judgment, finding the sentence not unduly harsh given it ran concurrently with a longer unrelated sentence.
- People v Hassett2026 NY Slip Op 06354
The court affirmed the convictions for criminal obstruction of breathing, aggravated criminal contempt, and first-degree criminal contempt, finding the evidence sufficient and the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s request for self-representation proper. The court also rejected claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and improper admission of evidence regarding the defendant’s attempts to lift the order of protection.
- People v Gilyard2026 NY Slip Op 06353
The appellate court affirmed the conviction and sentence, determining that the defendant’s unchallenged waiver of the right to appeal precluded his Eighth Amendment and youthful offender status challenges. Additionally, the court declined to exercise its power to take corrective action because the defendant failed to preserve his claims regarding the indictment’s jurisdictional defect and the facial constitutionality of the statute.
- People v Camp-Potter2026 NY Slip Op 06352
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence, finding that the defendant voluntarily consented to the officers’ entry into his motel room. The appellate court deferred to the trial court’s credibility determination, concluding that the totality of circumstances supported the finding of voluntary consent despite the presence of multiple officers.
October 28, 2026
- Wynter v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06351
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to vacate a dismissal order because the plaintiff failed to submit admissible evidence supporting the claim that counsel appeared at the scheduled inquest. The court held that a party alleging appearance by counsel must provide evidence in admissible form to support that assertion.
- Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB v Saunders2026 NY Slip Op 06350
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment and foreclosure judgment because the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the default. The court found that the attorney’s disbarment did not constitute a reasonable excuse, particularly given the lack of timely inquiry by the defendant and the timing of the disbarment relative to the default.
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, etc., respondent, v Eric Leder, etc., appellant, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06349
The inclusion of relevant bankruptcy rights information in the same envelope as the RPAPL 1304 notice did not violate the separate envelope requirement. Additionally, the loan servicer was properly authorized to send the required notices under a limited power of attorney.
- Williams v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06348
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the defendant because the defendant established that its actions did not deviate from accepted medical standards. The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact by not submitting an expert affirmation in opposition.
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Boyd2026 NY Slip Op 06347
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the foreclosure judgment, holding that the defendant waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by actively litigating the action without first asserting an objection. Additionally, the prior order denying the motion to dismiss was the law of the case regarding the jurisdictional arguments.
- Velasquez v 88 Cypress, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06346
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that the alleged sidewalk defect was trivial or that it lacked constructive notice. The court found the defendant’s expert affidavit insufficient because the inspection occurred more than three years after the accident without proof the condition remained unchanged.
- U.S. Bank National Association, etc., appellant, v Sandra Simpson, etc., respondent, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06345
The court held that the January 2018 order was a nullity because it was issued after the borrower’s death and before the substitution of a legal representative. Consequently, the December 2022 order was also properly vacated because the action remained dismissed.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Iqbal2026 NY Slip Op 06344
The plaintiff failed to establish standing for summary judgment because it did not submit admissible evidence proving it held the note at the time the action was commenced. The court affirmed the denial of the motion, noting that the plaintiff’s reliance on a servicer’s affidavit without personal knowledge or supporting records constituted inadmissible hearsay.
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v Ford2026 NY Slip Op 06343
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred, determining that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) constituted a change in the law that warranted reconsideration of the statute of limitations. Under FAPA, the voluntary discontinuance of prior foreclosure actions did not revive or reset the limitations period for the current action.
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v Diakhate2026 NY Slip Op 06342
The court affirmed the judgment of foreclosure and sale, holding that the plaintiff established standing by attaching the properly endorsed note to the complaint and that the defendant, as the estate’s administrator rather than the borrower, was not entitled to the 90-day notice required by RPAPL 1304. Additionally, the court found that the referee’s report was properly confirmed because the findings were substantially supported by the record and the plaintiff’s loan servicer provided a proper foundation for the admission of business records.
- U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v Alexander2026 NY Slip Op 06341
The court reversed the judgment of foreclosure and sale because the plaintiff failed to take proceedings toward entry of a default judgment within one year of the defendant’s default. The plaintiff’s excuses for the delay were deemed conclusory and unsubstantiated, requiring dismissal of the complaint against the defendant as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c).
- Sherpa v SRF Partnership, L.P.2026 NY Slip Op 06340
The court affirmed the lower court’s order vacating a default judgment under CPLR 317 because the defendant demonstrated it did not receive actual notice of the action due to an incorrect address on file with the Secretary of State. The defendant also established a potentially meritorious defense by showing the property was leased to another entity at the time of the incident.
- Schmeisser v 685 First Realty Co., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06339
The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment because he failed to establish a prima facie case that the defendants violated 12 NYCRR 23-1.7(d) and (e)(1). The plaintiff’s own deposition testimony raised triable issues of fact regarding the existence of a slippery condition and the duration of the tripping hazard.
- Schirmer v Piazza2026 NY Slip Op 06338
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate the money judgment because the appellants failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for their default in opposing the motion. The attorney’s unsubstantiated claim that court emails were in the wrong folder was insufficient to establish a reasonable excuse under CPLR 5015(a).
- Rajpaulsingh v Hidden Pond at Old Westbury, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06337
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims because the defendant failed to establish it lacked the authority to supervise or control the work. However, the court reversed the grant of summary judgment on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) claims, finding triable issues of fact regarding whether the construction manager acted as an agent of the owner or general contractor.
- People v Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 06336
The appellate court affirmed the defendant’s designation as a level two sex offender, finding that his argument for a downward departure was unpreserved because he did not request it at the hearing. Additionally, the court determined that the defendant failed to establish that a downward departure was warranted based on the risk assessment points.
- People v Call2026 NY Slip Op 06335
The Appellate Division reversed the defendant’s designation as a level three sex offender and designated him a level two sex offender because the People failed to prove aggravating circumstances warranting an upward departure. The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s application for a downward departure, finding that the substantial age disparity between the parties warranted maintaining the presumptive risk level.
- People v Romero-Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 06331
The court reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial because the trial court improperly precluded cross-examination of the complaining witness regarding her drug use and mental health diagnosis. The court found these errors were not harmless because the evidence of guilt was not overwhelming and the errors may have contributed to the conviction.
- People v Reyes2026 NY Slip Op 06330
The court affirmed the convictions for kidnapping, rape, and endangering the welfare of a child, finding that the defendant’s statements were not the product of custodial interrogation and that no Brady violation occurred. However, the court modified the sentence by reducing the kidnapping term and directing that all sentences run concurrently.
- People v Reed2026 NY Slip Op 06329
The Superior Court Information was jurisdictionally defective and a nullity because the defendant’s waiver of indictment occurred after a grand jury had already returned an indictment covering the same criminal transaction. Consequently, the conviction based on the defective information was reversed and the information was dismissed.
- People v Pichardo2026 NY Slip Op 06328
The court affirmed the conviction for second-degree murder and first-degree burglary, finding that the defendant’s statements were voluntarily made after a valid waiver of Miranda rights. The appellate court further determined that the evidence was legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence, and that any error regarding a missing witness charge was harmless.
- People v Newton2026 NY Slip Op 06326
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress physical evidence, finding that police had reasonable suspicion to stop the vehicle based on a database inquiry indicating stolen plates and probable cause to arrest based on the plain view observation of a gun. The court also held that the trial court did not err in instructing the jury that the lawfulness of the stop was not a question for them to decide.
- People v Matos-Colon2026 NY Slip Op 06322
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the trial court’s denial of a mistrial was harmless error because the curative instruction and overwhelming evidence of guilt negated any prejudice from the improperly played portion of a controlled call. Additionally, the court held that the defendant failed to preserve his sentencing arguments for appellate review.
- People v Irick2026 NY Slip Op 06321
The defendant’s challenge to his sentencing as a second felony offender was unpreserved for appellate review because he did not contest his status at the sentencing hearing. The court declined to exercise its interest of justice jurisdiction to reach the unpreserved issue.
- People v Chocoj-Marroquin2026 NY Slip Op 06316
The appellate court affirmed the judgment despite finding that the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently made due to the trial court’s failure to properly advise him of the attendant rights and the scope of the waiver. However, the court determined that the sentence imposed was not excessive, thereby upholding the conviction and sentence.
- People v Brown2026 NY Slip Op 06315
The court affirmed the judgment, finding the defendant’s claim regarding the voluntariness of her plea was unpreserved and without merit. Additionally, the court held that the delay in the appeal caused by counsel substitutions was not properly before the court on the appeal from the judgment.
- Newhouse v SSMG Realty, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06313
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment granting specific performance of a real property contract because the plaintiffs established they were ready, willing, and able to close. The defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the summary judgment motion.
- Nationstar Mtge., LLC v PLB Enters. USA, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06311
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order vacating a dismissal, holding that the plaintiff failed to establish a reasonable excuse for its default in appearing at a conference. The court found the plaintiff’s claim of law office failure unsubstantiated because the supporting attorney affirmation lacked personal knowledge of the error.
- Matter of Winter2026 NY Slip Op 06310
The court reversed the Surrogate’s Court’s order disqualifying the surviving spouse from receiving letters of administration, finding that the sister failed to meet her burden of proving abandonment. The court held that the evidence presented, consisting of unsigned and unsworn documents, was insufficient to establish disqualification under EPTL 5-1.2.
- Matter of United Realty Five, LLC v Niblack2026 NY Slip Op 06309
The Department of Finance committed an error of law by failing to classify a vacant lot in Queens zoned R6 as tax class one. The court affirmed the lower court’s decision to annul the denial and direct reclassification, noting that such land is properly class one regardless of any commercial overlay.
- Matter of T. C. v New York City Dept. of Educ.2026 NY Slip Op 06308
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim because the petitioners failed to demonstrate that the Department of Education had actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim. The court determined that the submitted reports indicated the crowd merely furnished the occasion for the accident, rather than showing that the municipality committed a potentially actionable wrong through negligent supervision.
- Matter of Olatunji v Animashaun2026 NY Slip Op 06307
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order enforcing a Nigerian custody decree under the UCCJEA, determining that Nigeria retained exclusive, continuing jurisdiction. The court held that the mother’s wrongful removal of the children to New York did not establish New York as the children’s home state.
- Matter of Jessica L.M. (Deborah M.)2026 NY Slip Op 06306
A ward subject to a guardianship proceeding under SCPA article 17-A is constitutionally entitled to select counsel of their own choosing. The Surrogate’s Court erred in disqualifying the petitioner’s retained counsel and appointing new counsel because the record demonstrated the petitioner freely and independently retained her attorney.
- Matter of Fernando v Village of Garden City, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06305
The court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the petition, finding that the hearing officer’s denial of the small claims assessment review had a rational basis. The petitioner failed to meet the burden of presenting sufficient evidence of excessive assessment, and the remaining contention was improperly raised for the first time on appeal.
- Matter of Deutschmann v Deutschmann Partners, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06304
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order granting the petition to decree the dissolution of the limited partnerships. The court determined that the petitioners established that the agreed-upon conditions for judicial dissolution were met and that no triable issues of fact were raised.
- Matter of Deutschmann v Deutschmann Partners, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06303
The Supreme Court properly denied the motion to dismiss the petition for dissolution and appointment of a receiver because the appellants failed to conclusively establish that the LLC was validly admitted as a general partner. The evidence submitted was ambiguous and of disputed authenticity, failing to meet the strict standard for dismissal under CPLR 3211(a)(1).
- Matter of D’Aleo v Arlington Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 06302
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the petition, finding that the hearing officer’s determination sustaining charges of misconduct and insubordination was rational and supported by evidence. The court held that the penalty of termination was not disproportionate to the offense and did not shock the sense of fairness.
- Matter of Congregation Radin Dev., Inc. v Town of Ramapo2026 NY Slip Op 06301
The court affirmed the dismissal of the petitioner’s claims because the respondents established that the petitioner was not organized exclusively for exempt purposes and that pecuniary profit could inure to its members. Consequently, the petitioner failed to satisfy the statutory requirements for a real property tax exemption under RPTL 420-a.
- Matter of Congregation Radin Dev., Inc. v Town of Ramapo2026 NY Slip Op 06300
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order precluding the petitioner from introducing certain evidence because it failed to comply with discovery demands. The court found that the petitioner’s repeated failure to produce required documents without a reasonable excuse supported an inference of willful and contumacious conduct.
- Matter of 11-19 Foam Place Holdings, LLC v Niblack2026 NY Slip Op 06298
The court affirmed the lower court’s judgment, holding that the Department of Finance committed an error of law by failing to reclassify a vacant lot in Queens as tax class one. The parcel was properly classified as tax class one because it was zoned residential and located outside of Manhattan, regardless of any commercial overlay.
- Milonas v Piro2026 NY Slip Op 06297
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s personal injury claim because the defendant established that the plaintiff negligently entered the roadway without yielding the right-of-way, which was the sole proximate cause of the collision. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the defendant’s fault.
- Midfirst Bank v McKenzie2026 NY Slip Op 06296
The court affirmed the lower court’s order severing the third-party actions from the main foreclosure action, finding that the trial court providently exercised its discretion to promote the prompt resolution of an eighteen-year-old case. Additionally, the court dismissed the purported appeal by the deceased defendant because the filing attorney lacked the authority to act on his behalf.
- Midfirst Bank v McKenzie2026 NY Slip Op 06295
The court dismissed the appeal filed on behalf of a deceased defendant due to lack of authority and dismissed the appeal regarding the denial of reargument as non-appealable. The court modified the lower court’s order to vacate a subsequent order as a nullity arising from the automatic stay upon the defendant’s death.
- Melendez v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06294
The court affirmed the dismissal of the personal injury complaint because the plaintiff failed to prove that the City received prior written notice of the specific crosswalk defect. The evidence showed that the symbols on the Big Apple maps did not correspond to the alleged defect, failing to satisfy the statutory condition precedent.
- Matos-Matos v City of Yonkers2026 NY Slip Op 06293
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, granting the City’s motion to dismiss the complaint. The court held that the City established it lacked prior written notice of the sidewalk defect and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the affirmative negligence exception applied.
- Magpantay v New York City Sch. Constr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 06292
The court granted summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding that the failure to secure a falling object was a proximate cause of the injury. However, it affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the Labor Law § 241(6) and § 200 claims due to triable issues of fact regarding the area’s exposure to falling objects and the defendants’ supervisory control.
- M. M. v Andriotis2026 NY Slip Op 06291
A resident physician acting under the supervision of an attending physician is not liable for medical malpractice if the supervising doctor’s directions did not greatly deviate from normal practice. The court affirmed summary judgment because the defendant demonstrated she was acting under supervision and the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding her independent liability.
- Ljusic v Petit2026 NY Slip Op 06290
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order granting leave to amend the complaint, finding that the plaintiffs’ proposed amendment to add a property damage claim was barred by significant prejudice and unreasonable delay. The court determined that the amendment constituted a significant expansion of claims sought after discovery was completed and without supporting documentation.
- Leader v 85 Quay St., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06289
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s refusal to dismiss the complaint for failure to provide discovery, finding that the defendant did not demonstrate the plaintiff’s conduct was willful and contumacious. The court held that the prior order was not a self-executing conditional order of dismissal and that the drastic remedy of striking a pleading was unwarranted given the plaintiff’s eventual compliance and explanations.
- Killerlane v Meagher & Meagher, P.C.2026 NY Slip Op 06288
The court affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motions to dismiss, holding that the amended complaint sufficiently stated a cause of action for breach of contract and violations of Labor Law article 6. The court further determined that the alleged oral agreement regarding referral fees was not barred by the statute of frauds.
- Innes v Ignis Dev., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06287
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s order vacating a default judgment under CPLR 317 because the defendant demonstrated it did not receive actual notice of the action due to an incorrect address on file with the Secretary of State. The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the defendant’s failure to update its address constituted a deliberate attempt to avoid service, noting the plaintiff knew the defendant’s actual business address.
- HSBC Mtge. Corp. (USA) v Gewirtz2026 NY Slip Op 06286
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment by producing the note, mortgage, and admissible business records of default. The court also affirmed the striking of the defendant’s affirmative defense of lack of standing, as the plaintiff was the original lender in direct privity with the defendant.
- Henshaw v Chelsea DHC, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06285
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s personal injury claim, finding that the defendants established the square opening in the fire escape was an open and obvious condition that was not inherently dangerous as a matter of law. The court further determined that the defendants maintained the property in a reasonably safe condition, and the plaintiff’s evidence failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
- Gharti v 33 Plaza, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06284
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to strike the defendant’s answer for spoliation of evidence. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish that the defendant intentionally or negligently destroyed key evidence, such as insurance reports or surveillance footage, or that the loss of such evidence deprived the plaintiff of the ability to prove his claim.
- Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Hollender2026 NY Slip Op 06283
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred, determining that the statute of limitations began running when the debt was first accelerated in 2009. The court held that unilateral de-acceleration letters failed to revive or reset the statute of limitations under CPLR 203 as amended by the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act.
- Eguzouwa v Curb Mobility, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06282
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss because the defendants violated the single motion rule of CPLR 3211(e). The defendants were barred from filing a subsequent motion to dismiss the amended complaint using the same arguments as their prior motion.
- DLJ Mtge. Capital, Inc. v Rubel2026 NY Slip Op 06281
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion for leave to renew its opposition to a dismissal. The court determined that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a change in the law, which is required for such a motion.
- Cuautle-Rosas v Caprio2026 NY Slip Op 06280
The court reversed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to compel depositions of nonparties and to dismiss the comparative negligence defense, finding the defendant’s liability conceded and the discovery request relevant. However, the court affirmed the denial of the motion to strike the answer and to amend the complaint for punitive damages, as the plaintiff failed to show willful misconduct or sufficient moral culpability.
- Citibank, NA v Moskovits2026 NY Slip Op 06279
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s grant of leave to enter a default judgment and denial of the defendant’s cross-motion for a late answer because the defendant failed to provide a reasonable excuse for his default. The court further held that the defendant waived any claim regarding personal jurisdiction by appearing in the action without moving to dismiss on that ground.
- Callahan v Montefiore Med. Ctr.2026 NY Slip Op 06278
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s defamation claim, finding that the medical records produced pursuant to a subpoena in a custody proceeding were protected by an absolute privilege. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the negligence per se claim and the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to renew.
- Blackshear v City of Yonkers2026 NY Slip Op 06277
The court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s personal injury claim because the defendants established that the fire truck driver complied with Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104 safety requirements. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding whether the driver acted in reckless disregard for the safety of others.
- BH Sterling Realty, LLC v Longoria2026 NY Slip Op 06276
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims against the LLC defendants, finding that the defendants failed to conclusively establish they were bona fide purchasers for value without actual or constructive knowledge of the unrecorded contract. The court held that the documentary evidence did not utterly refute the plaintiff’s allegations regarding the defendants’ knowledge of the prior interest in the property.
- Bank of America, N.A. v Noe2026 NY Slip Op 06275
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff established its standing by demonstrating physical possession of the note at the time the action was commenced. The court determined that the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact in opposition to the plaintiff’s prima facie showing.
- Anderson v Pfanner2026 NY Slip Op 06274
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal and subject matter jurisdiction, finding the plaintiff made a prima facie showing of domicile and that the declaratory relief did not necessarily require dissolution of foreign LLCs. However, the court reversed the grant of a preliminary injunction, holding that the plaintiff failed to establish the required elements of likelihood of success, irreparable injury, and balancing of equities.
- 21st Mortgage Corporation v. Hindy Rosenfeld2026 NY Slip Op 06273
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to require a hearing on the validity of service of process, as the defendant’s sworn denial sufficiently rebutted the presumption of service. The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to extend the time to serve unknown heirs because the statutory period under CPLR 205-a had expired.
- 217-20 K&A, LLC v De Maio Props., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06272
The plaintiff was not eligible for a preliminary injunction because it sought injunctive relief after the expiration of the cure period. Additionally, the plaintiff failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits because obtaining prospective insurance could not retrospectively cure the default arising from the failure to continually maintain insurance coverage.
- Deutsche Oel & Gas S.A. v Energy Capital Partners Mezzanine Opportunities Fund A, LP2026 NY Slip Op 51826[U]
The court granted the motion to compel discovery in part, finding that while both parties had a relevant basis for their demands, certain requests were overly broad and vague. The parties were directed to supplement their demands by limiting the scope of the improper requests or face vacatur, while being ordered to fully respond to the remaining proper demands.
- Slabakis v Olympos Trading Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 51825[U]
The court granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint because the plaintiff’s claim for a lost written agreement was barred by the statute of frauds and the Dead Man’s Statute, as he failed to provide admissible evidence of part performance or third-party corroboration. Additionally, the court denied the plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint to add a joint venture theory due to undue delay and insufficient factual allegations regarding the sharing of losses.
October 27, 2026
- People v Mears2026 NY Slip Op 06237
A justification instruction pursuant to Penal Law § 35.15 is available for a charge of endangering the welfare of a child when the prosecution’s case is premised on the defendant’s use of force. The refusal to give this instruction was not harmless error where a reasonable view of the evidence supported the defense.
- Matter of Jones (New York State Commn. on Jud. Conduct)2026 NY Slip Op 06236
The Court affirmed the Commission’s determination that the petitioner committed judicial misconduct by using a racial slur and making racially insensitive comments, which violated rules requiring judges to maintain public confidence in the judiciary’s impartiality. The Court held that the sanction of removal was warranted due to the egregious nature of the conduct, the petitioner’s lack of credibility, and his failure to accept responsibility for his actions.
- People v Salina B.2026 NY Slip Op 06235
The Court held that the defendant’s challenge to her plea was unpreserved for appellate review because she did not move to withdraw her plea or vacate the judgment. Consequently, the Appellate Division’s order was reversed and the case remitted for further proceedings.
- Ferguson v New Savoy Park II2026 NY Slip Op 06243
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to vacate a default judgment based on a reasonable excuse of law office failure and the submission of potentially meritorious defenses. Consequently, the court properly denied the plaintiff’s subsequent motion for entry of a money judgment.
- Vega v Archdiocese of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06270
The appeal was dismissed because the record lacked admissible evidence to support the appellant’s claims of attorney-client and work-product privileges. The court held that unsworn representations in appellate briefs are insufficient to establish the existence of these privileges for meaningful appellate review.
- Turner v Pride & Servs. El. Co. Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06269
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims against CEMD as time-barred because service on a different entity was insufficient to confer jurisdiction. Additionally, the court affirmed summary judgment for Kone, noting that the purchase agreement excluded personal injury liability and that the plaintiff’s successor liability argument was not properly raised.
- Sigler v Baldan2026 NY Slip Op 06268
The court affirmed the dismissal of fraudulent conveyance and unjust enrichment claims but reversed the dismissal of the declaratory judgment claim, holding that the plaintiff’s security interest in the co-op shares survived the Florida sheriff’s sale and judgment. The court also remanded the motion to disqualify defense counsel for further proceedings.
- Shiwprasad v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06267
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff’s expert testimony created triable issues of fact regarding the standard of care and causation. The court held that the absence of a certificate of compliance for the expert’s affirmation was not a fatal defect.
- Santana v Emerald 85-87 Vermilyea, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06266
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint because the defendants established they lacked actual or constructive notice of the defect. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact, as his affidavits contradicted his deposition testimony and his post-filing allegations regarding handrails were untimely.
- Renaissance Midtown West LLC v Lividini & Company, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06265
The dismissal of the landlord’s claims was affirmed because the landlord failed to provide the notice required by the lease before reentering and reletting the premises after the tenant vacated. Additionally, the claims for breach of guaranty and piercing the corporate veil were dismissed due to insufficient allegations and lack of documentary evidence.
- People v Garcia2026 NY Slip Op 06263
The court modified the judgment to vacate the conviction for criminal obstruction of breathing or blood circulation and dismiss that count to effectuate the plea bargain. The court affirmed the remaining conviction for strangulation in the second degree and declined to address the ineffective assistance claim.
- People v Eligio2026 NY Slip Op 06261
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the defendant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claim regarding the gun licensing law’s constitutionality was unreviewable on direct appeal because it required matters outside the record. Additionally, the court found no ineffective assistance because the underlying constitutional claim was unavailing.
- People v Lee2026 NY Slip Op 06259
The court held that the sentencing court’s denial of defense counsel’s attendance at the presentence interview was an improvident exercise of discretion. Consequently, the sentence was vacated and the matter remanded for resentencing following a new presentence interview where defense counsel may appear.
- People v Bonilla2026 NY Slip Op 06257
The appellate court dismissed the appeal because the defendant’s challenges to a voluntary forfeiture agreement were not properly before the court, as the forfeiture was not part of the judgment of conviction. The court noted that the forfeiture was based on a voluntary settlement of a potential civil proceeding governed by the CPLR, rather than a criminal sentence.
- Pemberton v Liberty Ashes Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06255
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint because the defendants established the plaintiff ran a red light and rode against one-way traffic. The court found the plaintiff’s expert opinions regarding the defendant’s marijuana use and speeding were speculative, conclusory, and contradicted by admissible GPS and video evidence.
- Oliveira v 5462th Realty LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06254
The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment on liability for the plaintiff’s Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding that the plaintiff was struck by a falling beam and that the defendants failed to provide appropriate safety devices. The court determined that the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the cause of the accident or the adequacy of safety measures.
- NYCTL 1998-2 Trust v Bethelite Community Baptist Church2026 NY Slip Op 06253
The defendant lacked standing to challenge the validity of the assignments of the foreclosure bid because its rights were extinguished at the foreclosure sale. Additionally, the court properly granted a writ of assistance to a nonparty because RPAPL 221 allows any adversely affected person to bring such a motion.
- Matter of Spiegelman2026 NY Slip Op 06252
The court found the attorney guilty of professional misconduct for misappropriating client funds and committing fraud, applying collateral estoppel to the prior civil judgment. The attorney was immediately suspended from the practice of law pending a referee’s recommendation on the final sanction.
- Martinez v 561 W. 144 Realty LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06251
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment because the defendant failed to establish that it lacked actual or constructive notice of the defective ceiling. The plaintiff’s testimony that building staff painted over visible mold created a triable issue of fact regarding the defendant’s knowledge of the defect.
- Laltitude LLC v Zhejiang Jiajiao Holdings Group Co., Ltd.2026 NY Slip Op 06249
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that the defendant’s attendance at a trade fair did not constitute purposeful activity or a substantial relationship to the breach of contract claim. The court determined that contacts occurring after the alleged breach cannot establish the defendant’s relationship with New York for jurisdictional purposes.
- Matter of L.R. v E.H.2026 NY Slip Op 06248
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the father’s request to keep his out-of-state address confidential, finding he failed to demonstrate an unreasonable risk to his safety. The court also upheld the limitation of the father’s visitation to New York until he disclosed his Nevada address, citing his financial circumstances and refusal to share travel costs.
- Matter of Hellman Elec. LLC v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06246
The DOT’s renewal of the contract without a specific fair-and-reasonable price determination was not arbitrary and capricious because the regulation only requires such a determination if applicable. The court found the DOT’s interpretation that the requirement applies only when there was no initial competitive bidding process to be rational.
- Matter of F.L.H. (A.G.L.)2026 NY Slip Op 06245
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order excluding the respondent from the marital home and finding him guilty of second-degree harassment and reckless endangerment. The court determined that the respondent’s aggressive conduct and threats established a safety concern, justifying the exclusion order despite the parties’ prior living arrangements.
- Matter of Filipski v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal2026 NY Slip Op 06244
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the petition to annul the DHCR determination, finding that the landlord satisfied its burden of proving the legitimacy of individual apartment improvements (IAIs) through contractor affidavits and receipts. The court held that the tenant’s personal observations were insufficient to establish a fraudulent scheme to deregulate the apartment.
- Dupree v NewYork-Presbyterian Columbia Univ. Irving Med. Ctr.2026 NY Slip Op 06242
The court modified the lower court’s order to reinstate the plaintiff’s negligence and negligent hiring claims, finding that dismissal was too drastic a sanction for counsel’s failure to appear personally. The dismissal of the medical malpractice claim was affirmed because the plaintiff failed to submit necessary expert medical opinion evidence.
- Chirico v 3|5|2 Capital ABS Fund LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06241
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal, reinstating the complaint because the plaintiff sufficiently alleged entitlement to advancement of legal fees under the Fund Agreements. The court found that the indemnity clause explicitly continues coverage for former employees and that the plaintiff adequately alleged the underlying actions were not internal disputes.
- Brown v Parkchester Preserv. Mgt.2026 NY Slip Op 06240
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment because the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact regarding whether a storm was in progress at the time of the fall. Additionally, the record presented unresolved questions about whether black ice existed prior to the storm and whether the defendant had constructive notice of the condition.
- Berko & Associates LLC v B. Jaffe Real Estate JV LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06239
The appellate court held that the plaintiff lacked standing to enforce the LLC Agreement because a no-third-party beneficiary clause barred enforcement by non-signatories, even if defined as affiliates. Consequently, the breach of contract claim was dismissed, but the quantum meruit claim was reinstated because factual issues remained regarding the reasonable value of services.
- Abuzaid v Almayouf2026 NY Slip Op 06238
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s orders imposing discovery sanctions, including striking the defendant’s answer and awarding attorneys’ fees, due to her chronic noncompliance with discovery obligations. The court held that the defendant’s pro se status did not excuse her failure to comply with court orders or her obstruction of the discovery process.
- Ormonde Equities, LLC v Workplayce 2030 Broadway, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 51799[U]
The court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the landlord, holding that the commercial tenant’s obligation to pay rent is an independent covenant that cannot be relieved by allegations of landlord breach absent an express provision. The landlord’s written demand satisfied statutory requirements, and the increased amount sought in the petition was not improper.
- 227-231 E 59th Partners LLC v Leoni2026 NY Slip Op 51798[U]
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of a motion to renew, granting the motion to set the matter down for a traverse hearing to determine if the tenant was properly served. The court also held that the waiver provision in CPLR 3211(e) does not apply in summary proceedings under RPAPL 711.
- 207-209 W. 107th St., LLC v De La Cruz2026 NY Slip Op 26192
The Appellate Term affirmed the award of attorneys’ fees to tenants who prevailed on a succession defense, rejecting the argument that the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019 barred such counterclaims. The court held that RPAPL § 702 (1) limits what constitutes rent in a summary proceeding but does not eliminate the statutory right to counterclaim for attorneys’ fees under RPL § 234.
- Castle Apparel Limited v Claudio Del Vecchio2026 NY Slip Op 51817[U]
The court denied the defendants’ motion to compel the plaintiffs to produce a nonparty consultant as a party witness, finding that the plaintiffs did not have the necessary control over the individual. The court determined that the defendants must seek discovery from the nonparty through subpoena or an open commission rather than compelling the opposing party to produce the witness.
October 22, 2026
- Genesee County Fish & Game Protective Assn., Inc. v Sullivan2026 NY Slip Op 06168
The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment, holding that the plaintiff established title by adverse possession to the disputed road. The majority found that the plaintiff’s proof of hostile and exclusive possession was sufficient and that defendants failed to raise any triable issue of fact.
- Kolli v Kaleida Health2026 NY Slip Op 06167
The Court held that the physician was covered under the hospital’s self-insurance plan and that the plan constituted an insurance policy subject to ‘other insurance’ clauses. Consequently, the hospital’s coverage was determined to be excess to the primary insurer, with the hospital and excess insurer sharing responsibility on a pro rata basis.
- Torres v Tinton Realty Group LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06233
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s claims against the defendant because triable issues of fact existed regarding whether the defendant acted as the general contractor. However, the court modified the order to grant summary judgment dismissing the property owner’s cross-claims for common-law indemnification and contribution against the defendant.
- Williams v Dia2026 NY Slip Op 06232
The court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff regarding liability against the defendant driver, finding him negligent as a matter of law, but reinstated the complaint against the other driver because the first driver’s negligence did not preclude comparative fault by the second. The court also held that the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact on causation through her expert’s opinion.
- Weiss v Salgado2026 NY Slip Op 06231
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, dismissing the complaint because the defendants met their prima facie burden of showing the treatment met the standard of care and the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. The plaintiff’s expert opinions were deemed unsupported or contradicted by the medical records regarding the use of intravenous lines and monitoring procedures.
- Wilson Tang, etc., Plaintiff-Respondent, v Vincent Tang, Defendant-Appellant2026 NY Slip Op 06230
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s finding of civil contempt, determining that the defendant failed to comply with a court order to add the plaintiff as an authorized representative on bank accounts and violated a settlement agreement by disparaging the plaintiff on social media.
- Matter of New York State Div. of Human Rights v D. Auxilly NYC LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06229
The court affirmed the Division of Human Rights’ order finding that the respondent discriminated against the complainant based on sexual orientation in violation of the NYSHRL. The court held that the First Amendment did not shield the business from liability because it refused to sell a previously designed and marketed garment rather than creating a customized expressive item.
- Matter of R.S. v M.T.2026 NY Slip Op 06228
The Appellate Division reversed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s motion to vacate a default custody order, finding that she demonstrated a reasonable excuse for her default and a meritorious defense. The court determined that the default order was improvidently entered given the mother’s safety concerns and the lack of sufficient evidence to determine the child’s best interests.
- Matter of L.S. v S.P.2026 NY Slip Op 06227
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order of protection, finding that the petitioner established by a fair preponderance of the evidence that the respondent committed menacing in the third degree and harassment in the second degree. The court deferred to the Family Court’s credibility determinations, noting the ample opportunity for cross-examination and demeanor assessment during the hearing.
- Matter of R.R. v J.I.F.2026 NY Slip Op 06226
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the father’s petition for visitation with prejudice, finding that visitation was not in the child’s best interests due to the father’s history of abuse and poor conduct. The court determined that the father’s refusal to take responsibility for his actions and his threatening behavior toward the child’s attorneys justified the trial court’s decision.
- Matter of Pirov v Caban2026 NY Slip Op 06225
The Board of Trustees’ denial of accidental disability retirement benefits was supported by substantial credible evidence because the officer’s injury resulted from a risk inherent in his regular job duties rather than an accident. The court found it rational to conclude that the officer could have reasonably anticipated encountering uneven pavement while responding to emergencies.
- PF2 Sec. Evaluations, Inc. v Fillebeen2026 NY Slip Op 06224
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of discovery sanctions, finding that the issues had already been resolved by a Special Referee and that the defendants’ conduct did not warrant sanctions. The court also rejected the argument for dismissal of counterclaims as a spoliation sanction due to insufficient evidence of destruction.
- People v Daly2026 NY Slip Op 06222
The Appellate Division affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding that the trial court properly admitted the surveillance video based on the totality of the evidence. The court determined that any uncertainty regarding the video’s authenticity went to its weight rather than its admissibility.
- People v Silver2026 NY Slip Op 06220
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to adjudicate the defendant a level two sexually violent offender, finding that the court properly declined to grant a downward departure. The court determined that the risk assessment instrument adequately accounted for the defendant’s mitigating factors, which were outweighed by the egregiousness of the underlying child abuse offense.
- People v Smith2026 NY Slip Op 06215
The court struck probation conditions requiring the defendant to support dependents, refrain from gang association, and pay mandatory surcharges, finding them not reasonably related to rehabilitation due to a lack of evidence of children or gang affiliation. The court affirmed the conviction and other probation conditions, noting that the defendant’s valid appeal waiver foreclosed review of his excessive sentence claim.
- People v D.M.2026 NY Slip Op 06212
The court affirmed the conviction but vacated the mandatory surcharge and crime victim assistance fee because the defendant was sentenced after the legislature repealed the statutory provisions authorizing such fees for youthful offenders. The court further held that the omission of a specific element during the plea allocution and the sequencing of trial rights discussions did not render the guilty plea invalid.
- People v Gregory2026 NY Slip Op 06211
The court affirmed the conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court also upheld the denial of the suppression motion, determining that the defendant’s abandonment of the firearm constituted an intentional relinquishment of any privacy interest.
- People v Rodriguez2026 NY Slip Op 06209
The court affirmed the convictions and sentences, finding that the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal foreclosed review of his challenges to the search warrant and excessive sentence. However, the court exercised its discretion in the interest of justice to vacate the surcharge and fees imposed at sentencing.
- Osei v Polanco-Puello2026 NY Slip Op 06207
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the plaintiff failed to establish a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d). The plaintiff’s expert failed to provide a causation opinion regarding the MRI findings, which defeated both the permanent limitation and 90/180-day claims.
- Nunez v Hispanic Socy. of Am.2026 NY Slip Op 06206
The court granted the plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim because he was working on an elevated work site without adequate safety devices. The court found that the defendant failed to raise an issue of fact regarding whether the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of the accident.
- Mury v Fashion Inst. of Tech.2026 NY Slip Op 06204
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plenary action because the plaintiff’s claims were duplicative of the pending article 78 proceeding, which is the exclusive forum for challenging educational disciplinary determinations. The appellate court further held that the plaintiff’s failure to raise specific arguments on appeal regarding the merits of her claims resulted in those claims being deemed abandoned.
- Menkes v Menkes2026 NY Slip Op 06203
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment directing that a home equity line of credit secured by the husband’s separate property be paid from the proceeds of the jointly owned marital residence. The court held that the debt incurred to acquire the marital residence is not transformed into a separate property obligation merely because it is secured by separate property.
- Medley Management Inc. v Lowenstein Sandler, LLP2026 NY Slip Op 06202
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the legal malpractice complaint, finding that the defendants’ advice was reasonable and that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate proximate cause or actual damages. The court determined that the plaintiff’s claims regarding the bankruptcy plan’s withdrawal and potential confirmation were speculative and insufficient to raise triable issues of fact.
- Maldonado v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06201
Summary judgment was properly granted because the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding whether the City had prior written notice of the specific defect or affirmatively created it. The City’s records showed no written complaints about the specific bump, and photographs of other nearby defects did not constitute a written acknowledgment of the injury-causing condition.
- Federal Natl. Mtge. Assn. v Hartsfield2026 NY Slip Op 06199
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action because the plaintiff failed to take proceedings for entry of judgment within one year after the defendant’s default, as required by CPLR 3215(c). The plaintiff was judicially estopped from arguing the defendant did not need to answer the amended complaint, and the defendant did not waive her right to seek dismissal by participating in the litigation.
- Denson v Donald J. Trump for President, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06197
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s retaliation claim, finding that the defendant’s arbitration filing raised triable issues of fact regarding whether the action was pretextual. The court determined that inconsistencies in the defendant’s stated reasons and the arbitrary nature of the damages demand allowed a jury to conclude the arbitration was motivated by retaliatory animus.
- Matter of Debnam v Metropolitan Transp. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 06196
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the petition because the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies by not properly submitting FOIL requests through the MTA’s designated channels. Additionally, the motion for default judgment was properly denied because it was filed while the MTA’s cross-motion to dismiss was still pending.
- Colliers Intl. NY LLC v City Hall Commons LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06195
The Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment for the broker, holding that a lease renewal agreement between the landlord and tenant that explicitly named the broker as exclusive and obligated the landlord to pay fees created a binding obligation to pay the commission. The court rejected the landlord’s argument that the lack of a separate brokerage agreement negated this express obligation.
- Chan v Fraley2026 NY Slip Op 06194
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of additional interim counsel fees, finding that the trial court improvidently exercised its discretion given the economic disparity between the parties. The court awarded an additional $10,000 in counsel fees to the plaintiff, noting that the previous award was inexplicably low considering the defendant’s dilatory behavior and the plaintiff’s financial burden.
- Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co. v Midland Pharm. Yonkers Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06193
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to affirmatively confirm the arbitration award and remanded the matter to fix the amount of attorneys’ fees owed to the respondent. The court held that the respondent was entitled to fees under Insurance Law § 5106(a) and that the trial court must review evidence to set a reasonable fee or determine it in its discretion if evidence is insufficient.
- Matter of Campaign for Accountability (Sarcone-Attorney Grievance Comm. for the Third Jud. Dept.)2026 NY Slip Op 06192
The court held that a presumptive First Amendment right of access attaches to the adjudicatory dispositions of attorney grievance committees, requiring their disclosure upon a showing of good cause. However, the court determined that no such right attaches to investigatory documents or internal work product, which remain confidential unless traditional good cause is established.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Sukljian2026 NY Slip Op 06191
The court reversed the grant of summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to establish standing as the holder of the note at the time the action was commenced. Specifically, the plaintiff did not provide evidence that the allonges containing the necessary endorsements were firmly affixed to the note when the lawsuit began.
- Matter of Iris YY. (Jasmine WW.-David XX.)2026 NY Slip Op 06190
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the mother’s parental rights, finding that she violated the terms of her suspended judgment by failing to maintain consistent visitation, engage in mental health counseling, and keep a safe residence. The court determined that the Family Court’s credibility determinations were supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record.
- Janof v Auto Warehouse2026 NY Slip Op 06189
The court reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial because the verdict sheet was internally inconsistent, as it allowed the jury to find the airbag design was not reasonably safe but that the manufacturer was not negligent in selecting that same design. The court determined that separate interrogatories for strict products liability and negligent design were redundant given the substantial factual overlap between the claims.
- Matter of Griffon Green, LLC v New York State Cannabis Control Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 06188
The court held that the Office of Cannabis Management’s determination to deem the petitioner’s application void was arbitrary and capricious because the delay was inadvertent and caused no prejudice to the respondents. The court reversed the lower court’s judgment, reinstated the application, and remitted the matter for further proceedings.
- Brew v Brew2026 NY Slip Op 06187
The court reversed the lower court’s grant of partial summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact regarding whether the defendants’ construction of a new roof and driveway constituted artificial means that diverted surface water onto the plaintiff’s property. The court determined that the creation of over 1,000 square feet of new impervious surface was sufficient to challenge the defendants’ claim that no artificial diversion occurred.
- Matter of Zechariah F. (Marcella F.)2026 NY Slip Op 06186
The court affirmed the Family Court’s adjudication of neglect and abuse based on the mother’s federal guilty plea admissions, rejecting her claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The matter was remitted solely to clarify the lower court’s inconsistent order regarding the younger child’s derivative severe abuse.
- Atkins v Atkins2026 NY Slip Op 06185
The Appellate Division affirmed the equitable distribution of marital property, including a 22.5% share of a business interest and related payments, finding no abuse of discretion despite the trial court’s failure to articulate specific statutory factors. The court also upheld the denial of a tax credit to the husband and the imposition of a below-statutory interest rate on the distributive award.
- Matter of Frank CC. v Samantha BB.2026 NY Slip Op 06183
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order modifying custody to grant the father primary physical custody, finding that the child’s exposure to domestic violence constituted a change in circumstances warranting a best interests review. The court determined that the mother’s instability and the father’s stable environment provided a sound and substantial basis for the modification.
- Four-Rosenbaum v Four-Rosenbaum2026 NY Slip Op 06182
The Supreme Court erred by analyzing the motion to limit child support arrears under Family Ct Act § 451 rather than Family Ct Act § 413 (1) (g), which prevents arrears from accruing if income is below the federal poverty guidelines. The matter was remitted for a hearing to determine if the statutory requirements for preventing arrears accrual were met.
- Matter of Jack CC. (Cassandra BB.)2026 NY Slip Op 06181
The appeals were dismissed as moot because the mother surrendered her parental rights, eliminating the live controversy. The court held that the exception to the mootness doctrine did not apply because the discovery issues did not typically evade appellate review.
- Matter of Matthew R. (Jaqueline R.)2026 NY Slip Op 06180
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s determination that the child was permanently neglected, finding that the petitioner made diligent efforts to reunify the family while the mother failed to plan for the child’s future. The court held that the mother’s challenge to the termination of parental rights was moot due to the child’s adoption, but the permanent neglect finding remained reviewable due to its significant stigma.
- Matter of Vera Y. v Joshua Y.2026 NY Slip Op 06179
The Appellate Division vacated the contempt finding and associated fine regarding the father’s failure to designate a pediatrician because the underlying court order was ambiguous. Additionally, the court reversed the child support award and remitted the matter for recalculation, finding that the father was denied due process when the Family Court entered the award despite assuring the parties it would refer the issue to a Support Magistrate.
- Riley v Daly2026 NY Slip Op 06178
The court reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ invasion of privacy claim and their cross-motion to set the boundary line by survey, finding that triable issues of fact existed regarding both the intent behind the surveillance cameras and the precise location of the boundary. The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the doctrine of practical location, as they failed to prove mutual acquiescence for the required period.
- Matter of Tammy Q. v Harold R.2026 NY Slip Op 06177
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s award of sole custody to the mother and denial of all forms of contact for the incarcerated father, finding that such contact was contrary to the child’s best interests. The court determined that the father’s violent crimes, long-term incarceration, and history of disregarding protection orders rebutted the presumption of visitation.
- People v Quick2026 NY Slip Op 06176
The court affirmed the conviction for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, finding that the evidence was sufficient to establish intent to sell. The court determined that possession of a substantial quantity of buprenorphine within a prison setting provided circumstantial proof of intent to sell, despite the absence of packaging materials.
- People v Bombard2026 NY Slip Op 06175
The court reversed the burglary conviction due to insufficient evidence proving the defendant had the intent to commit a crime at the moment of entry. It also ordered a new trial on the criminal trespass charge because the trial court erroneously precluded evidence of the defendant’s state of mind regarding permission to enter.
- People v Winston2026 NY Slip Op 06174
The court affirmed the convictions but modified the sentences, reducing the tampering sentence to 1 to 4 years and the possession sentence to 4.5 years in the interest of justice. The court found that the original maximum sentence was unduly harsh given the disparity with the codefendant’s sentence and the defendant’s acquittal on the intent to sell charge.
- People v Morrishaw2026 NY Slip Op 06173
The court affirmed the defendant’s convictions for promoting prison contraband and criminal possession of a weapon, finding that the evidence was legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court also rejected the defendant’s arguments regarding the suppression of statements and the admission of prior bad acts evidence.
- People v McCoy2026 NY Slip Op 06172
The Appellate Division affirmed the sentence imposed on the defendant, finding it was not harsh and severe despite the disparity between the pretrial plea offer and the post-trial sentence. The court emphasized the defendant’s extensive criminal history, his failure to accept responsibility, and his disrespectful behavior during the prosecution as key factors justifying the sentence.
- People v McCoy2026 NY Slip Op 06171
The Appellate Division affirmed the sentence for criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, finding it was not unduly harsh or severe. The court determined that the trial court properly considered all relevant factors, including the defendant’s criminal history and lack of accountability, despite the defendant’s arguments regarding trial deficiencies.
- People v Brown2026 NY Slip Op 06170
The court affirmed the convictions for burglary in the first degree and assault in the second degree, finding that the evidence was legally sufficient and supported by the weight of the evidence. The court also declined to correct the unpreserved challenge to the empanelment of an anonymous jury in the interest of justice.
- People v Anderson2026 NY Slip Op 06169
The court held that a trial judge’s off-the-record discussion with a juror regarding the instructions on deliberation constituted a nonministerial communication that violated the defendant’s right to be present. This violation constituted a mode of proceedings error mandating reversal of the convictions and a new trial, regardless of whether actual prejudice was shown.
October 21, 2026
- Young v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06166
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendants failed to demonstrate prima facie that they did not receive prior written notice of the defective boardwalk condition. The supporting affidavit was insufficient because it did not unequivocally assert that the search failed to reveal notice and did not attach the searched records.
- VK Dental Group, Inc. v Tender Touch Physical Therapy, PLLC2026 NY Slip Op 06164
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment in favor of the plaintiff because the defendants raised a triable issue of fact regarding the plaintiff’s failure to perform its contractual obligations. Specifically, evidence showed the plaintiff failed to pay for 50% of utilities and had gas service disconnected, precluding summary judgment.
- U.S. Bank National Association, etc., respondent, v William L. Vetri, etc., appellant, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06162
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s cross-motion to vacate the foreclosure judgment, finding that the defendant failed to demonstrate that newly discovered evidence would have produced a different result. Additionally, the defendant failed to establish a potentially meritorious defense or any fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by the plaintiff to support relief under CPLR 5015(a)(3).
- U.S. Bank National Association, etc., appellant, v Leon Pursoo, respondent, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 06161
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause or an interest of justice for extending the time to serve the defendant. The plaintiff’s failure to serve within the statutory 120-day period, coupled with a lack of evidence showing reasonable diligence or actual notice, warranted the vacatur of the prior order and dismissal of the complaint.
- Spain v Williams2026 NY Slip Op 06160
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s defamation claims, finding that the alleged statements were nonactionable opinion or rhetorical hyperbole rather than provable facts. The court further upheld the award of costs and attorneys’ fees to the defendants under the anti-SLAPP statute because the action lacked a substantial basis in law.
- Sapp-Gooding v Kreindler & Kreindler, LLP2026 NY Slip Op 06159
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss the legal malpractice claim, finding that the plaintiffs stated a cause of action and raised triable issues of fact regarding the continuous representation doctrine tolling the statute of limitations. Additionally, the court upheld the extension of time to serve the summons with notice in the interest of justice.
- Ruiz v Town of Southampton2026 NY Slip Op 06158
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on liability because the defendants provided a nonnegligent explanation for the rear-end collision, creating a triable issue of fact. The appeal regarding the dismissal of affirmative defenses was dismissed due to an inadequate record lacking the defendants’ answer.
- Rivera v M. GS Talukder2026 NY Slip Op 06157
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to the Uber defendants because they failed to eliminate all triable issues of fact regarding whether the driver was an employee or an independent contractor. The court determined that the classification of the driver as an employee or independent contractor is a factual issue for the jury, precluding summary judgment dismissal.
- Reyes v Chapman2026 NY Slip Op 06156
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of proving the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury under Insurance Law § 5102(d). The defendants’ expert failed to adequately explain why the plaintiff’s significant limitations in range of motion were voluntary, and the submissions failed to eliminate triable issues regarding causation and the 90/180-day category.
- Pruessen v Richard Capobianco, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06155
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s judgment as a matter of law, finding that a rational jury could conclude the defendant failed to exercise reasonable care to avoid a collision with a vehicle already in the intersection. The court also held that the trial court improperly excluded photographs of vehicle damage that were relevant to establishing liability.
- Perkins v 34 215 St, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06154
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, holding that the notary complied with statutory identity verification obligations and that the title company was not liable for negligence to a non-contracting party absent evidence of fraud or special circumstances.
- Perez v Premier Home Health Care Servs., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06153
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s breach of contract claim because the defendant demonstrated it did not terminate the plaintiff during the employment term. The plaintiff remained employed and compensated through the end of the contract, rendering him ineligible for severance benefits.
- People v Sanchez2026 NY Slip Op 06152
The court affirmed the defendant’s level two sex offender designation and the denial of a downward departure, but modified the order to remove the sexually violent offender designation. The court found that the evidence sufficiently supported the risk assessment points and that the significant age disparity between the parties precluded a downward departure based on the victim’s lack of consent.
- People v Vincent2026 NY Slip Op 06149
The conviction was reversed and the case remitted for a new trial because the trial court improperly admitted a police detective’s opinion on surveillance video footage, which usurped the jury’s fact-finding role, and admitted Molineux testimony where the prejudicial effect substantially outweighed its probative value. The court found these errors were not harmless given that the evidence of guilt was not overwhelming.
- People v Saylor2026 NY Slip Op 06148
The court held that the defendant’s appeal waiver was invalid because the oral colloquy mischaracterized the rights waived and occurred after the plea, rendering the written waiver insufficient to cure the defect. Despite the invalid waiver, the court affirmed the sentence as not excessive.
- People v Sanchez2026 NY Slip Op 06147
The court affirmed the conviction for grand larceny in the third degree, finding the evidence of property value legally sufficient. The court declined to review the ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appeal, directing the defendant to pursue it via a CPL 440.10 proceeding.
- People v Sanchez2026 NY Slip Op 06146
The court vacated the convictions for robbery in the first degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree because the police lacked a lawful basis to remove a driver’s license from the defendant’s pocket during a protective frisk. The admission of this evidence was not harmless error, as it significantly corroborated the prosecution’s case and influenced the jury’s verdict.
- People v Piccinonno2026 NY Slip Op 06145
The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence to support the convictions for attempted assault and other charges. The court further held that the sentence was not excessive and that the disparity between the trial sentence and the plea offer did not establish vindictiveness.
- People v Malla2026 NY Slip Op 06142
The appellate court reduced the defendant’s seven-year prison sentence to three and one-half years because the lower court failed to adequately account for the four years of federal detention the defendant had already served. The court also determined that the defendant’s purported appeal waiver was invalid because the colloquy did not ensure he understood the distinction between the right to appeal and rights forfeited by a guilty plea.
- People v Knowlin2026 NY Slip Op 06140
The appellate court held that the defendant’s purported waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the court failed to confirm his understanding of the written waiver and provided an unclear oral explanation. Consequently, the court reviewed the excessive sentence claim and affirmed the sentence as not excessive.
- People v Jackson2026 NY Slip Op 06139
The court held that while the defendant’s pre-Miranda statements in the holding cell were voluntary and spontaneous, the subsequent videotaped interrogation should have been suppressed because the initial pre-Miranda questioning constituted interrogation without a sufficient break. However, the error in admitting the videotaped interrogation was deemed harmless because the remaining evidence of guilt was overwhelming.
- People v Hayes2026 NY Slip Op 06137
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precluded review of the sentence’s excessiveness. Although the defendant’s challenge to the duration of the order of protection survived the waiver, the court declined to reach the issue because it was unpreserved and the defendant failed to seek relief from the issuing court first.
- People v Gouveia2026 NY Slip Op 06135
The court affirmed the conviction for manslaughter in the first degree, rejecting the defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel provided meaningful representation despite failing to introduce certain evidence or request a lesser included offense charge. The court determined that the defendant’s claims were based on unsubstantiated affidavits and that the overwhelming evidence of guilt negated any prejudice.
- People v Daniel2026 NY Slip Op 06133
The appellate court held that the defendant’s purported waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because it was not discussed as part of the plea bargain before the agreement was reached. Consequently, the court reviewed the excessive sentence claim and affirmed the sentence as not excessive.
- People v Chimborazo2026 NY Slip Op 06132
The judgments were reversed and the matter remitted for a new trial before a different Justice because the trial court conducted excessive and prejudicial questioning of witnesses, creating the impression that it was an advocate for the People. The court reached this unpreserved claim in the exercise of its interest of justice jurisdiction.
- O’Hanlon v Renwick2026 NY Slip Op 06129
The court affirmed the interlocutory judgment directing specific performance because the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the parties’ agreement on material terms. Additionally, the plaintiff’s subsequent conduct did not constitute an anticipatory repudiation of the original contract.
- O’Hanlon v Renwick2026 NY Slip Op 06128
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order, holding that the law of the case doctrine barred the defendant from conducting discovery on a statute of frauds defense that had already been determined in a prior appeal. Consequently, the defendant’s application for discovery was denied and the plaintiff’s application to preclude it was granted.
- New Residential Mtge., LLC v Tobing2026 NY Slip Op 06127
The court affirmed the lower court’s decision to vacate a prior foreclosure judgment and dismiss the complaint as time-barred. The court determined that the statute of limitations began running when the original 2008 action commenced and was not reset by the voluntary discontinuance of that action.
- Matter of Wolf2026 NY Slip Op 06125
The court affirmed the Special Referee’s report sustaining all eight charges of professional misconduct, including misappropriation and commingling of funds, and ordered the respondent’s disbarment. The court determined that the respondent’s misuse of an escrow account to shield personal funds from creditors and his failure to fully acknowledge the severity of his misconduct warranted the most severe sanction.
- Matter of United Financial Casualty Company v Sharon A. Jack, et al.2026 NY Slip Op 06124
The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition to stay arbitration because the petitioner failed to submit admissible evidence raising a triable issue of fact regarding whether the accident was staged. The vague allegations in the disclaimer letter and the late submission of an investigator’s affidavit were insufficient to justify a framed-issue hearing.
- Matter of Suffolk Regional Off-Track Betting Corp. v Town of Islip2026 NY Slip Op 06123
The court affirmed the tax exemption for the improved parcel housing the hotel and casino, finding it served the corporation’s purpose, but reversed the exemption for the ten vacant and undeveloped parcels. The appellate court determined that the evidence provided was insufficient to establish that the vacant land was used for the corporation’s specific corporate purpose.
- Matter of Mia A.P. (Dennis L.)2026 NY Slip Op 06121
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s finding of neglect and its denial of the mother’s motions to dismiss and vacate the finding. The court determined that the mother failed to establish good cause to vacate the neglect finding due to the serious nature of the conduct and her lack of insight into the harm caused to the child.
- Matter of Madaio v New York City Employees’ Retirement Sys.2026 NY Slip Op 06120
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to annul the denial of accidental disability retirement benefits, finding that the Board of Trustees’ determination was arbitrary and capricious. The court held that there was no rational basis for concluding that slipping on grease was a risk inherent in the work or a reasonably anticipated event.
- Matter of Lindo v Ponte2026 NY Slip Op 06118
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the CPLR article 78 proceeding, finding that the Administrative Law Judge was properly designated in writing as required by Civil Service Law § 75(2). The court determined that the 2012 letter from the DOC Commissioner designating OATH judges was sufficient to establish the ALJ’s jurisdiction.
- Matter of Itria Ventures, LLC v RVS Constr. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06117
The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant’s cross-motion to vacate an order directing the turnover of funds because the appellant failed to establish that the proffered evidence was undiscoverable through due diligence. Additionally, the appellant failed to demonstrate that the purportedly newly discovered evidence probably would have produced a different result.
- Matter of Erie Ins. Co. v Rodriguez2026 NY Slip Op 06115
Supplemental underinsured motorist (SUM) coverage is not triggered when the bodily injury liability limits of the tortfeasor’s insurance policies are greater than the third-party liability limits of the policy under which the claimant seeks SUM benefits. The court affirmed the stay of arbitration because the State Farm limits exceeded the Erie policy limits.
- Matter of Coven v Neptune Equities, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06114
The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the petition for judicial dissolution because the record failed to demonstrate that the dissension between the parties precluded the successful and profitable conduct of the corporation’s affairs. The court emphasized that the critical consideration is whether a deadlock exists, not who is at fault for the dissension.
- Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co. v Pfeffer2026 NY Slip Op 06113
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s award of $1,000 in attorneys’ fees because the Supreme Court failed to state the evidentiary basis for that specific determination. The matter was remitted for a new determination of the fee amount with a required statement of the evidentiary basis.
- Mortgage Assets Mgt., LLC v Robinson2026 NY Slip Op 06112
The court affirmed the dismissal of the mortgage foreclosure action as time-barred, holding that the statute of limitations began running upon the commencement of a prior action in 2014 and was not reset by its subsequent voluntary discontinuance. The court further granted the defendant’s counterclaim to cancel and discharge the mortgage under RPAPL 1501(4) due to the expiration of the limitations period.
- Mizrahi v Saraya2026 NY Slip Op 06110
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order, granting the plaintiff’s motion for leave to enter a default judgment and denying the defendants’ cross-motion to compel acceptance of a late answer. The court found that the defendants failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for their default, as their claim of law office failure was conclusory and unsubstantiated.
- McLeod v Atlantis Operating, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06109
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to grant the defendants’ motion to amend their answer to deny specific allegations of negligence, as the plaintiff failed to demonstrate prejudice. However, the court affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion to remove their admission of operating the nursing facility due to the expiration of the statute of limitations and lack of a reasonable excuse for delay.
- McLean v Nelson2026 NY Slip Op 06108
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendants failed to establish that they lacked actual or constructive notice of the hazardous condition. Additionally, the defendants did not demonstrate that the condition was open and obvious or not inherently dangerous as a matter of law.
- Liao v Sheng Sheng Constr., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06107
The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240(1) because the plaintiff demonstrated that a falling post required securing for the undertaking and was not adequately secured. The defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the foreseeability of the risk or the proximate cause of the injury.
- Latchana v Khubba2026 NY Slip Op 06106
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of mutual contempt motions, finding that neither party established by clear and convincing evidence that the other disobeyed court orders or caused prejudice. The court also upheld the grant of injunctive relief designating the defendant as the primary contact for the marital business and the denial of counsel fees due to a lack of evidence regarding financial conditions.
- Kibalya v Kibalya2026 NY Slip Op 06105
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the divorce action on the ground of forum non conveniens, finding that the trial court providently exercised its discretion. The court determined that the plaintiff’s residence in Australia, the defendant’s residence in Uganda, and the location of evidence and assets outside the United States militated against retaining the litigation in New York.
- Indian Harbor Insurance Company v SP & K Construction, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06104
The insurer failed to demonstrate entitlement to rescind the policy because it did not present documentation showing its underwriting practices would have prohibited issuance had the true facts been disclosed. The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint but modified the judgment to award the defendants costs and attorneys’ fees.
- HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Mohassib2026 NY Slip Op 06103
The Appellate Division modified the judgment by denying the motion to confirm the referee’s report and for a judgment of foreclosure and sale because the affiant failed to establish a proper foundation for the business records relied upon. The court also granted the intervenor’s application to toll the accrual of interest for specific periods of unexplained delay in the prosecution of the action.
- HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Min Young You2026 NY Slip Op 06102
The court affirmed the lower court’s decision granting the defendants’ motion to renew and dismissing the foreclosure complaint as time-barred. The court held that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) retroactively amended CPLR 3217(e) to prevent the voluntary discontinuance of a prior foreclosure action from resetting the statute of limitations.
- Federal National Mortgage Association v Taylor2026 NY Slip Op 06101
The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to vacate a prior dismissal order because the subsequent foreclosure action was adjudicated time-barred. Under RPAPL 1301(4), this adjudication renders the earlier action barred by the statute of limitations as well.
- Federal National Mortgage Association v Fishbein2026 NY Slip Op 06100
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred, holding that the voluntary discontinuance of a prior action did not reset the statute of limitations under the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act. The court determined that the plaintiff could not unilaterally revive the accrual of the cause of action after the initial acceleration of the mortgage debt.
- Fareverse, LLC v Bourne2026 NY Slip Op 06099
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order granting the defendant’s motion to toll the accrual of interest on the mortgage loan. The court held that the defendant failed to demonstrate that the plaintiff was responsible for unexplained delays or other wrongful conduct in the prosecution of the foreclosure action.
- Evaristo v GH 441 1st Fee, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06098
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff demonstrated a prima facie entitlement to judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim. The court held that the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding statutory violation or the plaintiff’s sole proximate cause of injury.
- Duran v FLA Mtge. Capital 2, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06097
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s action to cancel a mortgage, holding that the defendant, as an assignee of a federal agency, is entitled to immunity from New York’s statute of limitations. This immunity applies even if the defendant is an assignee of a commercial lender to which the federal agency had previously assigned the mortgage.
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas, etc., respondent, v Favio Taveras, etc., et al., defendants, Freddy Duran, appellant.2026 NY Slip Op 06096
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion for leave to renew because the defendant improperly asserted a new legal argument rather than relying on new facts or a change in law. Additionally, the defendant failed to provide sufficient evidence, such as a complaint, to prove that a prior action to foreclose the same mortgage was pending.
- De Almeida v Scavone2026 NY Slip Op 06095
The Appellate Division affirmed the order compelling the defendants to provide discovery but modified it by deleting the provision that conditionally struck their answer. The court found that while the lower court properly exercised discretion in compelling discovery, it did not providently exercise discretion in imposing the sanction of striking the answer.
- Da Silva v Delshah-OTL-Start 22 Chapel Prop. Owner, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06094
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims because the defendants failed to eliminate triable issues of fact regarding their authority to supervise the work and their constructive notice of the dangerous condition. The court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claims predicated on specific Industrial Code violations, finding the cited regulations inapplicable to the facts.
- Connors v Kushner Cos., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06093
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to amend the complaint because a motion to renew is the appropriate vehicle for seeking relief based on a change in the law. Additionally, the proposed amendment was patently devoid of merit.
- Connors v Kushner Cos., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06092
The court affirmed the lower court’s determination that units subject to a temporary student housing exemption resumed rent-stabilized status upon the exemption’s expiration, but could be lawfully deregulated under the then-applicable luxury deregulation provisions if the legal regulated rent met the statutory threshold. The court held that the defendants failed to meet their burden of proof to establish that specific units were legally deregulated or substantially altered to qualify for a first stabilization rate.
- Conde-Rosado v Young Don Oh2026 NY Slip Op 06091
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the medical malpractice claim but reversed the dismissal of the lack of informed consent claim. The defendants failed to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment on informed consent because the plaintiff’s testimony contradicted the expert’s assertion that risks were discussed.
- City of New York v Arlene M. Tropp 2002 Revocable Trust2026 NY Slip Op 06090
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment because they failed to eliminate triable issues of fact regarding zoning compliance and the applicability of reasonable accommodation claims. The court found that the defendants’ disability-based arguments did not address all alleged violations and failed to demonstrate the absence of material facts regarding selective enforcement.
- Cheemanlall v Toolsee2026 NY Slip Op 06089
The court held that the plaintiffs’ motion to enforce the judgment for specific performance was barred by the doctrine of laches due to unreasonable delay. However, the court reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the claim for the return of the down payment, finding that the defendant was not ready, willing, and able to perform.
- Burton v Gurung2026 NY Slip Op 06088
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the livery defendants because they established they were not at fault in the accident. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the cause of the collision or the prematurity of the motion.
- Buitrago v Cascade 553, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06087
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim. The court found that while the plaintiffs established a prima facie case, the defendants raised a triable issue of fact regarding whether the falling plywood required securing.
- Bolanos v 50 Clinton Property Owner, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06086
The court affirmed summary judgment for the plaintiff on Labor Law § 240(1) liability, finding that the plaintiff demonstrated a hazard and the failure to secure a scaffold cross brace. The defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding whether the plaintiff’s conduct was the sole proximate cause of the injury.
- Bethpage Federal Credit Union v Anthony Pepe2026 NY Slip Op 06085
The court reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff because the RPAPL 1304 notices failed to include the mandatory website address for the NYS Office of the Attorney General’s Homeowner Protection Program. Consequently, the notices were facially defective, and the defendant was entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint against him.
- Bank of America, N.A. v Maddox2026 NY Slip Op 06084
The court reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff because the plaintiff failed to establish prima facie standing and strict compliance with RPAPL 1304 notice requirements. Specifically, the plaintiff could not prove it held the note at the time of commencement or that the required 90-day notice was sent by both certified and first-class mail.
- Baize v 24 Hour Fitness2026 NY Slip Op 06083
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim for lost earnings because the plaintiff failed to prove actual past earnings with reasonable certainty. Additionally, the court held that while the plaintiff’s cross-motion was generally untimely, the branch concerning lost earnings could be entertained because it was based on nearly identical grounds to the defendants’ timely motion.
- Apuzzo v Central Cabinets, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06082
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion to set aside the decision and for a new inquest because the plaintiff failed to establish his entitlement to damages. The trial court providently exercised its discretion in precluding the plaintiff’s witness from testifying regarding the value of the cabinets because the witness lacked the requisite experience to render such an opinion.
- American Transit Insurance Company v Bliss Acupuncture, P.C.2026 NY Slip Op 06081
The dismissal of a de novo action due to the plaintiff’s failure to comply with discovery demands revives the underlying master arbitration award, making it binding on the parties. Consequently, the defendant is entitled to confirmation of that award and an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees for services performed in connection with the de novo action and the appeal.
- Fifth Ave. 25G, LLC v Sambar2026 NY Slip Op 51760[U]
The court reversed the final judgments and remanded the matter for a traverse hearing because the tenant’s sworn nonconclusory denial of service created a factual issue regarding proper service. The court held that the tenant did not waive the personal jurisdiction defense by moving for summary judgment on the merits.
- Toyota Motor Credit Corp. v Linen2026 NY Slip Op 51759[U]
The appeal is dismissed as nonappealable because the order granting class certification was entered on default after the plaintiff failed to file opposition papers. The court held that the proper remedy was to move to vacate the default, not to seek reargument or appeal the underlying order directly.
- Decker Assoc., LLC v Deutsch2026 NY Slip Op 51758[U]
The court affirmed the judgment of possession, holding that the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the Loft Board issued its final rent order in September 2024. The court also rejected the tenant’s laches defense because the delay in seeking rent increases was caused by the Loft Board rather than the landlord.
October 20, 2026
- United States Fire Insurance Company et al. v Michael Palin et al.2026 NY Slip Op 06080
The appeal was dismissed as taken from a nonappealable paper because an order declining to sign an order to show cause is an ex parte order that does not decide a motion made on notice. The court also declined to grant leave to appeal in the interest of justice, finding that the plaintiffs’ expenditure of resources to perfect the appeal did not constitute a unique circumstance warranting such relief.
- Matter of Troise v Marchiano2026 NY Slip Op 06079
The court affirmed the denial of a petition to annul an OATH determination, holding that mandamus is not appropriate to compel the processing of document requests in a specific manner when the agency’s redirection of requests and added requirements constitute discretionary acts rather than ministerial duties. The court found that OATH’s decision to require submissions to a dedicated email address and proof of entitlement was supported by a rational basis and was not arbitrary or capricious.
- Stabile v Dragonetti Bros. Landscaping Nursery & Florist, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06078
The Supreme Court properly granted class certification because the worker affirmations sufficiently demonstrated that common questions of law and fact predominated regarding the systematic failure to pay prevailing wages. The court held that individualized determinations of whether specific landscaping tasks constituted construction-like labor do not defeat commonality at the certification stage.
- Sanchez-Rodriguez v Bruce2026 NY Slip Op 06077
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact regarding which vehicle was required to yield the right of way. The conflicting testimony and the obstruction caused by a third-party truck prevented a conclusive determination of liability as a matter of law.
- Matter of People ex rel. Magee v Maginley-Liddie2026 NY Slip Op 06073
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of a habeas corpus petition, holding that the period between arraignment and the pretrial motion deadline was excludable from speedy trial calculations under CPL 30.30(4)(a). The court determined that the motion schedule was not a sua sponte adjournment requiring consent, but rather a reasonable delay for pretrial motions based on defense counsel’s representations.
- People v Letang2026 NY Slip Op 06072
The conviction for criminal possession of a controlled substance was affirmed because the evidence was not against the weight of the evidence and the trial court properly admitted the narcotics despite chain of custody gaps. The court also properly precluded evidence of prior sales by another person and denied the motion to reopen the Mapp hearing based on conclusory allegations.
- People v Oquendo2026 NY Slip Op 06071
The court affirmed the defendant’s sentences, holding that he waived his argument regarding jury determination of tolling periods by freely admitting to them in the offender statements. Additionally, the court determined that the federal decision in Erlinger does not apply to New York’s tolling provisions.
- People v Gray2026 NY Slip Op 06070
The judgment convicting the defendant of scheme to defraud in the first degree is affirmed because the People proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the court had territorial jurisdiction. The defendant’s admission during plea allocution that he consigned stolen items to be sold in a New York auction house satisfied the jurisdictional requirements.
- People v Mercado2026 NY Slip Op 06069
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the defendant’s Miranda waiver was valid and not limited to the specific subject of the bench warrant arrest. Additionally, the court found no due process violation in the curtailment of questioning regarding police deception, as the officers were lawfully permitted to question the defendant on the present charges despite his right to counsel attaching to unrelated charges.
- Matter of Patterson v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 06068
The Supreme Court properly denied the petitioner’s motion to renew because he failed to present new evidence that would alter the prior dismissal of his article 78 petition. A finding by another court that the petitioner resigned rather than was terminated does not constitute new evidence sufficient to change the outcome of the prior decisions.
- Matter of S.B.N. (J.N.)2026 NY Slip Op 06067
The court affirmed the termination of the mother’s parental rights, finding that clear and convincing evidence established her inability to provide proper care due to mental illness. The expert’s opinion was deemed competent despite the lack of direct observation of the mother’s interactions with the children.
- Mema v Procida Constr. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06066
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on Labor Law § 200 and common-law negligence claims because the defendant failed to establish a lack of supervisory control. However, it reversed the grant of partial summary judgment on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding that the plaintiff’s testimony regarding a wet floor created a triable issue of fact regarding causation.
- Mella v Russian Samovar, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06065
The out-of-possession landlord was not contractually obligated to maintain the lighting, which was not a structural defect, and was entitled to summary judgment on its cross-claim for contractual indemnification. The plaintiff’s expert evidence was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the proximate cause of the accident.
- IKB International S.A. in Liquidation et al. v Morgan Stanley et al.2026 NY Slip Op 06064
The court affirmed the exclusion of evidence regarding collateral characteristics and securitizations not specifically alleged in the complaint, finding that such evidence would prejudice the defendants. Additionally, the court dismissed the appeal from the consent order because the plaintiffs were not aggrieved by the dismissal of their own complaint.
- Gonzalez v Chatsworth Bldrs. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06063
The court modified the lower court’s order to deny the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on liability under Labor Law § 240(1) because the defendants raised a triable issue of fact regarding the occurrence of the accident and the causal relationship of the injuries. The defendants’ evidence, including witness statements and expert medical opinions, was sufficient to preclude summary judgment.
- Matter of E.V. v M.L.P.2026 NY Slip Op 06062
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the father’s petition for custody modification, finding that the child’s best interests were served by remaining in the mother’s primary custody. The court modified the contempt fine to $250 because the lower court failed to find actual loss or injury, and remanded the matter to determine the father’s reasonable counsel fees.
- Cura Found. v Shaya2026 NY Slip Op 06061
The court held that the promissory note was an instrument for the payment of money only under CPLR 3213, permitting summary judgment in lieu of complaint. The defendant’s defenses of fraud and breach of the underlying pledge agreement were insufficient to defeat the motion because the note contained an unconditional payment clause and the alleged fraud was legally insufficient.
- Matter of C.P. v D.H.2026 NY Slip Op 06060
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order granting the father primary physical custody, finding a change in circumstances and that the best interests of the children were served by the modification. The court relied on evidence of poor hygiene, dental care, and school attendance in the mother’s care, as well as credible testimony regarding domestic violence witnessed by the children.
- Alesco Preferred Funding VIII, Ltd. v ACP Re, Ltd.2026 NY Slip Op 06059
The court granted summary judgment dismissing claims against defendants for breach of indenture, common-law successor liability, alter ego, tortious interference, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty. It held that unrebutted expert testimony established the defendants were not contractual successors, and that New York law did not apply to the common-law successor liability claim against ACP Re due to minimal Bermuda contacts.
- 513 W. 26th Realty LLC v George Billis Galleries, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 06058
The court held that New York City Administrative Code § 22-1005, which temporarily barred the enforcement of personal liability guaranties for certain commercial leases during the pandemic, does not violate the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution. Applying the three-part test, the court found the law served a legitimate public purpose and was a reasonable and appropriate means of addressing the economic emergency, warranting substantial deference to the legislative judgment.
- Lafayette Nelson Apts., LLC v Perez2026 NY Slip Op 51747[U]
The Appellate Term affirmed the lower court’s judgment granting the landlord possession and rent arrears, finding that the tenant’s warranty of habitability defense failed because he did not make the apartment available for repairs. The court also noted that the tenant’s harassment counterclaim was abandoned and would be without merit regardless.
- 3890-98 Broadway Assoc. LLC v Hiraldo2026 NY Slip Op 51746[U]
The court affirmed the denial of the respondent’s motion to vacate a default judgment, finding that the process server’s affidavit established proper service and the respondent’s conclusory denial was insufficient to rebut the presumption. Additionally, the respondent failed to demonstrate a meritorious defense to the holdover proceeding after failing to vacate a temporary apartment following the repair of her original unit.
- 525 W. 52 Prop. Owner v Tsokanos2026 NY Slip Op 51745[U]
The Appellate Term affirmed the final judgments awarding possession and damages, finding that the tenant’s challenge to the trial date acceleration was unavailing due to his prior acquiescence. The court further held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying an adjournment request based on the tenant’s travel plans.
- Caban v Oscar’s Gold & Diamonds2026 NY Slip Op 51744[U]
The court affirmed the trial court’s decision to limit plaintiffs’ recovery to $550.00 because they failed to provide competent evidence that the converted jewelry was worth more. Additionally, the court ruled that plaintiffs were not entitled to damages based on the sentimental value of the items.
- East Harlem MEC Parcel C, L.P. v Smalls2026 NY Slip Op 51743[U]
The Civil Court did not abuse its discretion in denying the landlord’s motion to renew its opposition because the landlord failed to justify the delay and the new evidence would not change the prior determination. The court found that an unsworn letter from the Department of Buildings did not constitute a formal agency opinion or definitive final agency determination entitled to deference.
October 15, 2026
- Wilmington Savings Fund Society, etc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v David Lopez, Jr., etc., et al., Defendants-Respondents.2026 NY Slip Op 06037
A property owner who is not the original borrower lacks standing to raise defenses based on the lender’s failure to comply with RPAPL 1304 or contractual pre-foreclosure notice requirements. Such defenses are personal to the original borrower and cannot be asserted by a transferee or heir who is a stranger to the note and mortgage.
- Waterworks Operating Co., LLC v 514 W. 24th Owner LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06036
The court vacated the judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings on damages because the plaintiff failed to meet its prima facie burden of establishing delivery of all materials required by the contract. The court held that evidence submitted in reply papers without an opportunity for rebuttal must be disregarded.
- Sowah v Oueteouakam2026 NY Slip Op 06035
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the complaint because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate a serious injury to her cervical and lumbar spine under Insurance Law § 5102(d). The plaintiff’s experts did not sufficiently address or rule out the chronic, degenerative changes identified by the defendant’s expert radiologist as the cause of her symptoms.
- Sarante v Courtlandt Dev. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06034
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of defendants’ motion to compel a further deposition of the plaintiff after the note of issue was filed. The court found that defendants failed to demonstrate unusual and unanticipated circumstances warranting post-note of issue discovery based on unproven allegations in unrelated actions.
- RBL Bank Limited v Veria Lifestyle Inc., et al.2026 NY Slip Op 06033
The court affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, holding that the foreign bank’s sporadic dealings did not constitute doing business in New York, thus exempting it from registration requirements. Additionally, the defendants waived the Banking Law defense by failing to plead it initially and by not appealing the denial of their motion to amend.
- Matter of S.R. v E.C.2026 NY Slip Op 06032
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the mother’s petition to modify custody because her testimony failed to demonstrate a material change in circumstances. Obtaining a larger apartment and growing closer to the children did not establish a need to alter the existing custody arrangement for the children’s best interests.
- People v Burton2026 NY Slip Op 06027
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, rejecting the defendant’s claim that a minor overstatement of his maximum potential penalty rendered his guilty plea involuntary. However, the court vacated the surcharges and fees imposed at sentencing as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice.
- People v James2026 NY Slip Op 06026
The conviction for disorderly conduct was affirmed because the evidence was legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence, particularly regarding the defendant’s aggressive confrontation with police. The court rejected the defendant’s claims of prosecutorial misconduct and Brady violations, finding them unpreserved or unsupported by the record.
- People v Canty2026 NY Slip Op 06025
The Appellate Division affirmed the SORA court’s decision to adjudicate the defendant a level two sexually violent offender, finding no abuse of discretion in denying a downward departure. The court determined that the defendant’s treatment participation and other mitigating factors did not outweigh the egregiousness of the underlying offenses.
- People v Williams2026 NY Slip Op 06024
The court affirmed the conviction, noting that the defendant validly waived his right to appeal, which forecloses review of the suppression decision. Alternatively, the court held that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the search because he had no expectation of privacy in the apartment.
- People v Ortega2026 NY Slip Op 06022
The court affirmed the judgment and declined to review unpreserved challenges to probation conditions, finding them reasonably necessary and appropriate given the defendant’s history of substance abuse and the victim’s order of protection. The court also denied the request to modify the jurisdictional condition to allow visits to the defendant’s son, who lives with the protected victim.
- People v Tracey2026 NY Slip Op 06021
The court modified the judgment to vacate the mandatory surcharge and fees imposed on the defendant at sentencing. This relief was granted based on the court’s own interest of justice powers, noting that the People did not oppose the action.
- People v Henriques2026 NY Slip Op 06019
The conviction was affirmed because the defendant was not deprived of his right to testify before the grand jury, as the prosecutor offered a new grand jury and voted on remaining counts after the defendant declined to testify. Additionally, the defendant waived his challenge to the jury instructions by explicitly approving them and failing to object, and the court found no basis to reduce the sentence.
- Parker v 66 St. Nicholas Place, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06016
The court modified the lower court’s order to direct the joinder of the new owner as a defendant rather than substituting them for the former owner. This modification was necessary because substitution would prejudice the plaintiff by requiring discovery from a nonparty regarding the prior owner’s willful conduct.
- Matter of Panasia Estate, Inc. v 29 W. 19 Condominium2026 NY Slip Op 06015
The Supreme Court properly awarded attorneys’ fees to the respondent under RPAPL 881, as the American rule does not preclude such awards to respondents who are haled into court for the petitioner’s sole benefit. A prevailing party determination is not required for these fee awards, and recent statutory amendments do not affect the court’s discretion in this regard.
- Matter of Sokolski2026 NY Slip Op 06014
The court affirmed the finding of professional misconduct for failure to maintain bookkeeping records, rejecting the argument that rule 1.15(d) applies only to the attorney who personally conducts transactions. The court imposed a three-month suspension, determining that the respondent’s prolonged neglect of fiduciary duties despite warning signs warranted a sanction more severe than the recommended public censure.
- Matter of McCollum2026 NY Slip Op 06013
The court granted the Attorney Grievance Committee’s motion for interim suspension, finding that the respondent’s sworn admissions of professional misconduct and her persistent failure to comply with lawful demands warranted immediate suspension. The court determined that the respondent’s lack of cooperation and failure to substantiate claimed health issues supported the finding of conduct immediately threatening the public interest.
- Matter of J.M. v N.R.2026 NY Slip Op 06012
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s orders awarding the fathers sole legal and physical custody of the children, finding the decision had a sound and substantial basis in the record. The court determined that the fathers were better able to provide a stable home and that joint custody was inappropriate due to mistrust and lack of communication between the parents.
- Lee v Zeitlin2026 NY Slip Op 06010
The court affirmed summary judgment for plaintiffs on breach of contract and account stated claims, finding defendants failed to fulfill contractual obligations without valid offset or mitigation defenses. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment on defendants’ counterclaim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing as premature due to pending discovery.
- Latazela v Compass Six Owner LLC2026 NY Slip Op 06009
The court affirmed the grant of partial summary judgment to the plaintiff on Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 241(6) claims, finding that the plaintiff’s fall from a moving scaffold without proper anchor points or guardrails established a prima facie case. The court rejected the defendants’ arguments that the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause of his injuries or that expert biomechanical evidence raised a triable issue of fact.
- Matter of Ak.D.L.M. (J.J.M.)2026 NY Slip Op 06008
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the father’s parental rights based on a finding of permanent neglect, supported by clear and convincing evidence that he failed to plan for the children’s future. The court noted that the father failed to consistently visit or complete necessary services despite the agency’s diligent efforts to facilitate his service plan.
- Kocher v Mount Sinai Hosp.2026 NY Slip Op 06007
The court granted the plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment on the City HRL claim for failure to engage in a cooperative dialogue, while denying both parties’ summary judgment motions on the reasonable accommodation claims under both the State and City HRLs.
- Matter of A.K. v P.C.2026 NY Slip Op 06005
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s award of sole legal and physical custody to the mother, finding that visitation with the father was not in the child’s best interests due to prior family offenses and the father’s lack of accountability. The court also noted that the child’s expressed wish against visitation was properly considered as a factor in the best interests analysis.
- Matter of S.N.C. also known as S.N.G. An Alleged Incapacitated Person v Michael Goldman2026 NY Slip Op 06004
The Appellate Division affirmed the revocation of a power of attorney because the agents breached their fiduciary duties by paying themselves without proper documentation and mismanaging the incapacitated person’s accounts. The court rejected the argument that the power of attorney remained valid solely because the principal was competent when it was executed, citing statutory language to the contrary.
- Hall v Trustees of Columbia Univ. in the City of N.Y.2026 NY Slip Op 06003
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s protective order limiting the third-party observer at the plaintiff’s neuropsychological examination to a licensed clinical psychologist. The court found that the presence of the plaintiff’s attorney would prevent the expert from conducting a meaningful examination.
- Gonzalez v Country Manor Apts.2026 NY Slip Op 06002
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s amended complaint because the statute of limitations had expired before the actual property owners were joined as parties. The court found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause for an extension of time to serve process due to a lack of reasonably diligent efforts to identify the correct defendants.
- Matter of Guralny2026 NY Slip Op 06001
The court affirmed the lower court’s order declaring the lifetime trust null and void because no assets were transferred to it during the decedent’s life. Consequently, the estate must be distributed pursuant to intestacy laws rather than the trust’s directives.
- Dalessandro v Dalessandro2026 NY Slip Op 06000
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of a motion for leave to serve a late answer, finding that the delay was short, caused by reasonable law office failure, and did not prejudice the plaintiff. The court emphasized the strong public policy favoring the resolution of cases on their merits.
- City of New York v Heritage Health & Hous., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05998
The court affirmed the denial of motions to dismiss, determining that the agreements at issue were licenses rather than leases because they contained broad termination rights and prohibited assignment. Consequently, the defendants were not entitled to the notice requirements applicable to terminating a tenancy.
- BFAM Asian Opportunities Master Fund, LP v Glory Health Indus. Ltd.2026 NY Slip Op 05997
Beneficial owners of notes held through a clearing system have standing to sue based on STAC letters and clearing policies, even if not direct holders. A Chinese law making performance impossible does not excuse performance under a New York law-governed contract lacking a force majeure clause.
- Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (McErlane)2026 NY Slip Op 06057
The court granted the respondent’s motion for reinstatement to the practice of law after determining by clear and convincing evidence that she complied with the suspension order and possessed the requisite character and fitness. The court further found that reinstatement would be in the public interest, effective immediately.
- Wallkill Valley Land Trust, Inc. v Richards2026 NY Slip Op 06047
The Town of Gardiner is a necessary party to the third-party complaint because any judgment affecting the rail trail would encumber the Town’s fee ownership. Consequently, the third-party complaint must be dismissed due to the nonjoinder of this necessary party, and the defendant’s affirmative defenses are barred by res judicata resulting from the stipulation of discontinuance.
- Matter of Rendon v Cosan Constr. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 06046
The Workers’ Compensation Board properly refused to consider new documentary evidence submitted on administrative appeal without a sworn affidavit explaining its unavailability at the hearing. The Board’s determination that the claimant’s neck, back, shoulder, ankle, and knee injuries were causally connected to the work-related fall was supported by substantial evidence.
- Matter of Brown v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 06045
The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers’ Compensation Board’s denial of benefits, finding that the claimant’s PTSD did not result from stress greater than that ordinarily encountered in his job as a station cleaner. The court determined that witnessing a platform accident and cleaning blood were within the scope of his expected duties, failing to meet the threshold for a compensable accidental injury.
- Matter of Greek v Dansville Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 06044
The Board did not abuse its discretion in denying the employer’s request to abate the claim due to the decedent’s death, as the record was sufficiently developed through surveillance video and medical records. Substantial evidence supported the Board’s determination that the decedent’s injuries and subsequent death arose out of and in the course of his employment.
- Matter of Buscemi v Prime Care Coordination2026 NY Slip Op 06043
The Board properly denied the claimant’s application for reopening or rehearing because the proffered medical letter was not accompanied by a required sworn supporting affidavit. Additionally, the Board properly denied the application for reconsideration as the claimant failed to demonstrate newly discovered evidence or a material change in condition.
- People v Roblee2026 NY Slip Op 06042
The court affirmed the conviction, determining that the defendant’s valid, knowing, and voluntary waiver of the right to appeal precluded his challenges to the sentence and the factual sufficiency of his plea. Additionally, the court held that a typographical error in the underlying order of protection did not constitute a nonwaivable jurisdictional defect that would survive the guilty plea.
- People v Hummel-Parker2026 NY Slip Op 06041
The court held that the defendant’s appeal waiver was invalid due to overbroad language that was not cured by the oral colloquy. However, the judgment was affirmed because the plea was voluntary and the enhanced sentence was not unduly harsh or severe.
- People v Banks2026 NY Slip Op 06040
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant’s appeal waiver was valid and that his plea was not involuntary due to an unfulfilled promise or ineffective assistance of counsel. The court found that the delay in sentencing did not constitute a broken promise and that the defendant received an advantageous plea despite counsel’s alleged errors regarding restitution and program timing.
- People v Rinzler2026 NY Slip Op 06039
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant’s guilty plea foreclosed his challenge to the sufficiency of the grand jury evidence. The court also determined that the indictment was not jurisdictionally defective because the counts incorporated the applicable statutory provisions.
- People v Downey2026 NY Slip Op 06038
The court held that the defendant did not validly waive his right to appeal due to overbroad language in the written waiver and a deficient oral colloquy. However, the court affirmed the sentence, finding it was not unduly harsh or severe given the nature of the crime.
- SM I MMS, LLC v Fearless Music TV, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 51716[U]
The court reversed the denial of a motion to vacate a default final judgment of possession, finding that the respondent’s documented cardiac emergency constituted a reasonable excuse for the default. Additionally, the respondent demonstrated potentially meritorious defenses regarding whether the governing agreement was a lease or a license and the validity of the non-renewal notice.
- 65 FW Owner LLC v Espinal2026 NY Slip Op 51715[U]
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment and dismissed the nonpayment proceeding because the summary judgment record conclusively established a violation of the building’s certificate of occupancy. Under Multiple Dwelling Law § 302 (1) (b), the landlord is barred from recovering rent for the period of noncompliance with the certificate of occupancy.
- Zigelstein v Shuping Tong2026 NY Slip Op 51714[U]
The court affirmed the dismissal of the trespass claim because the plaintiff failed to provide objective proof of property boundaries to establish a prima facie case. Additionally, the harassment claim was dismissed because New York law does not recognize a civil cause of action for harassment.
- Obah v Google Roblox & Roblox2026 NY Slip Op 51713[U]
The court reversed the dismissal of the complaint, reinstating the matter for a traverse hearing because the defendant’s sworn, nonconclusory denial of service raised a factual issue. Additionally, the court held that an endorsed complaint failing to adequately apprise the defendant of the action’s nature should not be dismissed outright, but rather the plaintiff should be directed to file a formal pleading.
October 14, 2026
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Begum2026 NY Slip Op 05996
The judgment of foreclosure and sale is affirmed because the plaintiff established standing and compliance with RPAPL 1303 notice requirements. The appellant’s objections to the referee’s report were deemed untimely, and her remaining arguments were either improperly raised for the first time on appeal or without merit.
- Wardi v Alexim Holdings, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05995
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ complaint under CPLR 3211(a)(4) because a separate action between the same parties for the same cause of action was already pending. The court determined that the plaintiffs’ action was not considered pending for this purpose because their complaint was not filed and served until after the defendant’s complaint in the separate action.
- Vashovsky v Zablocki2026 NY Slip Op 05994
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the motion to vacate the receiver’s commission, finding that the Supreme Court properly exercised its discretion in awarding a commission of $425,000. The court determined that the awarded amount was less than the statutory maximum of five percent and was reasonable based on the specific circumstances of the case.
- Vashovsky v Zablocki2026 NY Slip Op 05993
The appellate court reversed the lower court’s denial of the motion to dismiss, granting dismissal of the causes of action for interference with a prospective economic advantage. The court held that the plaintiff’s complaint failed to sufficiently allege that the defendants’ actions were meant solely to harm the plaintiff or constituted wrongful means.
- Vashovsky v Zablocki2026 NY Slip Op 05992
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the complaint to assert RICO and fraud claims because the proposed causes of action were palpably insufficient. Additionally, the court correctly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on their breach of contract counterclaim because the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact regarding waiver.
- US Bank National Association, etc., respondent, v Jason Vento, appellant, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 05991
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s confirmation of the referee’s report because the referee failed to identify documents or sources supporting the finding that the mortgaged premises should be sold in one parcel. The matter was remitted for a new determination regarding whether the property can be sold in parcels.
- U.S. Bank, NA v Lang2026 NY Slip Op 05990
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred because the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) replaced the CPLR 205(a) savings provision with CPLR 205-a, which does not apply to prior actions dismissed as abandoned. Consequently, the plaintiff could not rely on the six-month savings provision to toll the statute of limitations for the new action.
- U.S. Bank N.A. v Fulford2026 NY Slip Op 05989
The appeal from the foreclosure judgment was dismissed because no appeal lies from a judgment granted upon the default of the appealing party. The motion to vacate the judgment was properly denied because the defendant failed to establish a reasonable excuse for his default, which is required to vacate a default based on intrinsic fraud.
- Tymoshenko v Levitansky2026 NY Slip Op 05988
The court reversed the lower court’s order, granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint because it contained no factual allegations against her. The court also denied the plaintiff’s cross-motion for leave to serve a second amended complaint because the relation-back doctrine was inapplicable and the new claims were time-barred.
- Tullis v City of Yonkers2026 NY Slip Op 05987
The court affirmed the dismissal of false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution claims against the officers and the City because identified citizens provided sufficient information to establish probable cause. The court further held that the City could not be held vicariously liable for the officers’ actions and dismissed the negligent supervision claim as a result.
- Soutar v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05986
The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding the defendants failed to raise a triable issue regarding the ladder’s security or a recalcitrant worker defense. The court also affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Labor Law §§ 200 and 241(6) claims, as the defendants failed to make a prima facie showing that the relevant regulations were inapplicable or that they lacked control over the work site.
- Salazar v Carol Joy Family Props., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05985
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the defendant mortgagee because it established that it was an out-of-possession mortgagee that did not own, possess, or control the property. Consequently, the defendant did not owe a duty of care to the plaintiff for the dangerous condition on the sidewalk.
- Sadore Lane Gardens, Inc. v City of Yonkers2026 NY Slip Op 05984
The court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the causal connection between the municipality’s alleged negligence and the flooding. The municipality was immune from liability for the design of its sewerage system and the plaintiff was not an intended third-party beneficiary of the maintenance agreement.
- People v Berta2026 NY Slip Op 05983
The court affirmed the designation of the defendant as a level three sex offender, finding that he failed to establish that his age or health issues warranted a downward departure from the presumptive risk level. The appellate court determined that the defendant did not demonstrate that these factors resulted in an overassessment of his risk to public safety.
- People v Pressley2026 NY Slip Op 05978
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precluded review of the sentence’s excessiveness. The court declined to exercise interest of justice jurisdiction regarding the order of protection because the issue was unpreserved.
- People v Owoaje2026 NY Slip Op 05977
The judgment convicting the defendant of sexual abuse in the first degree and endangering the welfare of a child is affirmed. The court found no error in the replacement of an unsworn juror, the admission of DNA evidence, or the exclusion of certain hearsay and grand jury testimony, and determined that any improper prosecutorial comments were harmless.
- People v Milligan2026 NY Slip Op 05975
The court affirmed the judgment, finding that the defendant’s claims regarding the withdrawal of his plea and judicial bias were unpreserved or based on matters outside the record. The court determined that the plea was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, and directed that the mixed claim of ineffective assistance of counsel be raised in a CPL 440.10 proceeding.
- People v Manzi2026 NY Slip Op 05974
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the County Court did not improperly delegate judicial authority by allowing the Probation Department to determine the appropriateness of specific program conditions. The court further determined that the defendant’s arguments regarding the tailoring of conditions and coercion were unpreserved for appellate review.
- People v Guzman2026 NY Slip Op 05972
The court vacated several convictions, including strangulation and assault, because the evidence was legally insufficient to prove physical injury or that the objects used were dangerous instruments. Additionally, certain counts were dismissed as duplicitous because they encompassed multiple acts, making it impossible to determine the basis for the guilty verdict.
- People v Gaston2026 NY Slip Op 05971
The court reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial because the trial court improperly dismissed the entire sworn jury panel without first inquiring into the remaining jurors’ ability to be fair and impartial. This action violated the defendant’s constitutional right to a jury selected according to law, and the error was not subject to harmless error analysis.
- People v Gast2026 NY Slip Op 05970
The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the accomplice testimony was sufficiently corroborated to satisfy the legal requirements. However, the court modified the sentence to make the term for one count of burglary in the first degree as a hate crime run concurrently with all other sentences.
- Pennymac Corp. v New York City Envtl. Control Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 05966
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of a nonparty’s motion to stay enforcement of a foreclosure judgment. The court held that the nonparty was bound by the proceedings because its conveyance was recorded after the filing of a notice of pendency.
- Pennymac Corp. v New York City Envtl. Control Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 05965
The court affirmed the denial of a nonparty’s motion to intervene and vacate a foreclosure judgment as untimely. The nonparty was deemed to have constructive notice of the action via a filed notice of pendency and failed to justify a 14-year delay in seeking relief.
- Nunez v Spiegel2026 NY Slip Op 05964
The Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying the discharged attorney’s motion for an allocation of a portion of the net contingency fee, as there was sufficient evidence to determine the firm’s proportionate share of the work. The Appellate Division modified the order to grant the discharged firm 10% of the net contingency fee based on the time, labor, and effectiveness of its prior representation.
- Neil v Areeba, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05963
The court reversed the denial of leave to amend the complaint to add a Labor Law § 200 claim, finding it was not palpably insufficient. However, the court affirmed the denial of leave to add a Labor Law § 240(1) claim because the plaintiff’s duties as a porter did not involve the erection or demolition of a structure.
- Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Fernandez2026 NY Slip Op 05962
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action as time-barred and the cancellation of the mortgage, finding that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) applied retroactively to preclude the plaintiff from using the CPLR 205(a) savings provision after a prior dismissal for neglect. The six-year statute of limitations began running upon the acceleration of the debt in the prior 2007 action, and the current action was commenced too late to be timely.
- Matter of VN Property, Inc. v Byrne2026 NY Slip Op 05961
The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the petition, finding that the Zoning Board of Appeals’ denial of area variances was supported by a rational basis and the record. The court determined that the board properly applied the statutory balancing test and did not act arbitrarily or capriciously.
- Matter of Telesford v Hartofilis2026 NY Slip Op 05960
The court denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding on the merits because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the relief sought. The court held that the extraordinary remedy of mandamus is limited to compelling the performance of a ministerial act.
- Matter of Sincere S. (Kelsey L.R.)2026 NY Slip Op 05959
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s motion to vacate a finding of neglect. The court determined that the mother failed to establish good cause and did not demonstrate that vacating the finding would serve the child’s best interests.
- Matter of New York State Div. of Human Rights v Boston Mkt. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05958
The court confirmed the determination that Boston Market Corporation unlawfully discriminated against the complainant based on sex and upheld the associated damages and civil penalties. However, the court annulled the portion of the determination seeking enforcement against the individual respondent, Nicholas Foreman, because he cannot be held individually liable for the damages awarded.
- Matter of Multani v Singh2026 NY Slip Op 05957
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s orders granting the mother sole custody and dismissing the father’s petition, finding that the father failed to provide a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear at the hearing. The court also affirmed the denial of the father’s motion to vacate the default, noting his lack of explanation for not contacting the court or his attorney during his hospitalization.
- Matter of Marchese Assoc., LLC v Limitless Auto. Group, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05956
The court affirmed the cancellation of a notice of pendency because, once the plaintiff was determined to be entitled only to monetary damages rather than specific performance, maintaining the notice carried indicia of bad faith. The likelihood of success on the merits was deemed irrelevant to the validity of the notice under CPLR 6514.
- Matter of Kahn2026 NY Slip Op 05955
The court imposed reciprocal disbarment on the respondent based on his consent to disbarment in New Jersey for knowing misappropriation of escrow funds. The court determined that the sanction warranted under New York rules for an attorney who submits a resignation during a grievance investigation is disbarment.
- Matter of Zyhir J. (Garland J.)2026 NY Slip Op 05954
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s finding that the father neglected the children, as the evidence established he took them to shoplift, grew marijuana in their sleeping area, and asked them to provide urine samples for his own tests. The court further held that the children’s out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated by their consistency and mutual support.
- Matter of Hunter v Zoning Bd. of Appeals of the Town of Islip2026 NY Slip Op 05953
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s dismissal of the petition, finding that the Zoning Board of Appeals’ denial of area variances was not arbitrary or capricious. The court determined that the Board properly applied the required balancing test and that the petitioners failed to demonstrate that the Board reached a different result on essentially the same facts as a prior permit.
- Matter of George v Ranga2026 NY Slip Op 05952
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s objections, finding that she failed to demonstrate diligent attempts to secure commensurate employment. Consequently, the Support Magistrate properly based the child support calculation on the mother’s 2024 tax return income rather than her current reduced earnings.
- Matter of Aron Law, PLLC v Town of Hempstead2026 NY Slip Op 05951
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the petition because the petitioner failed to exhaust administrative remedies. The petitioner initiated the proceeding before the Town had issued a final determination on the FOIL request, and the petitioner did not appeal the Town’s subsequent response.
- Matter of Aron Law, PLLC v Town of Hempstead2026 NY Slip Op 05950
The court held that the petitioner exhausted administrative remedies because the Town failed to timely respond to the FOIL appeal, and the petitioner substantially prevailed, entitling them to an award of attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. The branch of the petition seeking to compel production of records was properly dismissed as moot because the Town had already produced all responsive documents during the pendency of the proceeding.
- Martinez v Hands of Hope P.T., P.C.2026 NY Slip Op 05949
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim under the New York City Human Rights Law against the employer, holding that a physical therapist assistant’s sexual assault was outside the scope of employment. The court determined that such conduct, committed for wholly personal motives, does not further the employer’s business and thus precludes vicarious liability.
- Malone v Spaliviero2026 NY Slip Op 05948
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order granting the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the defendant’s statute of limitations defense. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish the defense was without merit and improperly introduced new evidence in their reply affirmation.
- Majid v Manna2026 NY Slip Op 05947
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment because the plaintiff’s affidavit of service established a prima facie case of proper service that the defendant failed to rebut. Additionally, the defendant failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for her default in answering the complaint.
- Majid v Manna2026 NY Slip Op 05946
The court affirmed the extension of time to serve the defendant under CPLR 306-b, finding no prejudice despite defective initial service. However, the court modified the lower court’s order to deny the plaintiff’s request for alternative service under CPLR 308(5) due to a lack of evidence that ordinary service was impracticable.
- Kelly v Magarie2026 NY Slip Op 05945
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the process server exercised due diligence before resorting to affix and mail service. The process server’s testimony regarding inquiries into the defendant’s employment was deemed insufficient to satisfy the legal requirements for valid service under CPLR 308(4).
- Keil v Willow Wood Assoc. LP2026 NY Slip Op 05944
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion to restore the action to the active calendar because she failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her default in appearing at compliance conferences. The plaintiff’s allegation that incoming counsel filed the matter under an incorrect index number was deemed conclusory and unsubstantiated, particularly given that counsel had previously appeared for a conference.
- Hidalgo v R.R. 590 Oak Family Limited Partnership2026 NY Slip Op 05943
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s Labor Law § 240(1) claim because the defendants established that the injury was not the result of an elevation-related hazard or gravity-related risk. The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the falling glass was caused by the absence or inadequacy of a safety device prescribed by the statute.
- Hernandez v Board of Mgrs. of the NOMA Condominium2026 NY Slip Op 05942
The court affirmed summary judgment on liability for Labor Law § 240(1) violations, finding the defendants failed to provide adequate safety devices for elevated work. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment on Labor Law § 241(6) and third-party claims, as triable issues of fact remained regarding statutory violations and contractual compliance.
- Henick-Lane, Inc. v Hudson Meridian Constr. Group, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05941
The court affirmed the dismissal of counterclaims for purely economic losses based on an unambiguous indemnity clause that specifically excluded such damages. However, the court reversed the summary judgment regarding costs for security and lost equipment, finding triable issues of fact concerning whether these were consequential damages reasonably contemplated by the parties.
- Grubmarket, Inc. v Thai2026 NY Slip Op 05940
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss the first counterclaim for breach of contract but granted the motion to dismiss the second counterclaim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The dismissal of the second counterclaim was warranted because the allegations sought tort remedies or were duplicative of the contract claim, and the employment agreement permitted termination at will.
- Green Tree Servicing, LLC v Roberts2026 NY Slip Op 05939
The appeal is dismissed because the nonparty-appellant is not aggrieved by the order and judgment of foreclosure and sale. The appellant lacked standing as he neither moved for relief nor was relief granted against him, and the judgment did not directly affect him.
- GCM Funding, LLC v Pulse Nail Spa in Buford, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05938
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s second motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate good cause for making a successive motion. The court found that the plaintiff did not show why the evidence was not available during the first motion and that the motion did not fit within the narrow exception to the successive summary judgment rule.
- Fung v Exxon Mobil Oil Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05937
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the abutting property owner because the defendant established that the City of New York controlled the fire hydrant that caused the plaintiff’s fall. The court determined that the property owner did not create the dangerous condition, make negligent repairs, or violate a statute imposing liability for the specific hazard.
- Escobar v Sanchez2026 NY Slip Op 05936
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing cross-claims against the front driver and finding liability for the rear-end collision, as the rear driver failed to provide a nonnegligent explanation. The emergency doctrine defense was rejected because the defendant’s affidavit contradicted his earlier statements in the police report, constituting a feigned issue of fact.
- Durante v Transform SR Brands, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05935
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the defendants established that the assault was unforeseeable, negating their duty to control third-party conduct. The plaintiff’s expert opinion was deemed conclusory and insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact regarding foreseeability.
- Deutsche Bank, National Trust Company, etc., v Vicki Suhyun Wong, respondent, et al., defendants.2026 NY Slip Op 05934
The court affirmed the lower court’s order granting summary judgment to the defendants, rejecting the plaintiff’s arguments that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) could not be applied retroactively. The court held that the voluntary discontinuance of a prior foreclosure action did not revoke the acceleration of the loan or reset the statute of limitations.
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v Pamela Merrill2026 NY Slip Op 05933
The court affirmed the dismissal of the foreclosure action and the grant of the counterclaim to cancel the mortgage, holding that the statute of limitations began running when the plaintiff accelerated the debt in a prior action. The court determined that the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) prevents the voluntary discontinuance of a prior action from reviving or resetting the statute of limitations.
- Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Roy Hall2026 NY Slip Op 05932
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to grant the plaintiff an extension of time to serve the summons and complaint under CPLR 306-b, finding that the extension was justified in the interest of justice. The court also rejected the defendant’s argument for dismissal based on failure to comply with RPAPL 1303, as the statute does not apply to non-owner-occupied properties.
- Davidoff v Hershfield2026 NY Slip Op 05931
The court reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment and granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss because the promissory note lacked clear language expressly providing for the recovery of fees on fees. The court held that such a right to recover attorneys’ fees for prosecuting a claim for attorneys’ fees must be based on a specific contractual provision and cannot be implied.
- Christiana Trust v Victor2026 NY Slip Op 05930
The court held that a defendant who serves an untimely answer waives the right to seek dismissal of the complaint as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c). Furthermore, because the defendant never vacated his default, he was precluded from raising affirmative defenses such as lack of standing and statute of limitations.
- CFS Enterprises, Inc. v CG & J Realty, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05929
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate a mechanic’s lien bond because the defendant failed to strictly comply with the service requirements of Lien Law § 59. Additionally, the court denied the plaintiff’s request for attorneys’ fees, finding that the defendant’s appeal was not frivolous.
- Bonilla-Acosta v Max Servs. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05928
The defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden of establishing that the plaintiffs did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102(d). The court found that the biomechanical expert’s opinions were insufficient to establish causation because he lacked the qualifications to render medical opinions on causation and improperly rejected the plaintiffs’ deposition testimonies.
- Board of Mgrs. of Oceanview Condominium v Riccardi2026 NY Slip Op 05927
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment and its grant of the plaintiff’s cross-motion for civil contempt. The court held that the law of the case doctrine barred the defendant from re-examining issues that were already determined on a prior appeal.
- Bank of N.Y. Mellon v DeLoney2026 NY Slip Op 05925
The defendant retained standing to defend the foreclosure action because the plaintiff sought a deficiency judgment against him despite his conveyance of the property. The court affirmed the judgment of foreclosure and sale, finding that the defendant failed to demonstrate a basis for vacating the summary judgment order.
- Alexim Holdings, LLC v Chang-Wardi2026 NY Slip Op 05924
The court affirmed the dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim because a valid contract governed the subject matter, but reversed the denial of the motion to dismiss the injunctive relief claim. The court held that injunctive relief was inappropriate because the builder’s injury could be adequately compensated by money damages.
- 260 Prestige Brownstone 260 Corp. v 260 Clifton Pl, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05923
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint because the documentary evidence did not utterly refute the plaintiff’s claim to a 50% interest in the property. The court found that the chain of title did not conclusively establish the defendant’s grantor had authority to convey a 100% interest, nor did a broker agreement establish equitable estoppel.
October 13, 2026
- Matter of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Papailias2026 NY Slip Op 05922
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff adequately established the defendant’s default, compliance with statutory notice requirements, and standing. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the defendant’s affirmative defenses, deeming them refuted, conclusory, or abandoned.
- Vera v BH Broadway Owner LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05921
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to dismiss the Dram Shop Act claim as asserted by the plaintiff in her individual capacity for loss of support. However, the court modified the order to dismiss the claim insofar as it was asserted on behalf of the decedent’s estate, as the statute does not allow the intoxicated person or their estate to sue for injuries resulting from their own intoxication.
- People v Soto2026 NY Slip Op 05918
The court modified the judgment to vacate the specific expiration date of the order of protection because it was incorrectly calculated based on the wrong conviction and without accounting for jail time credit. The matter was remanded for a new determination of the order’s duration, while the order itself remains in effect pending that determination.
- People v Anaya2026 NY Slip Op 05913
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s petition to modify his sex offender classification, finding that mitigating factors were outweighed by the seriousness of the offense and recidivism. The defendant failed to establish that his age, health, or family support reduced his likelihood of reoffense.
- Mitchell v Pullman SST, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05912
The court affirmed the grant of partial summary judgment on a Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding that the plaintiff’s injury resulted from efforts to prevent a heavy beam from falling, which constitutes a covered gravity-related risk. The court also rejected the defendants’ sole proximate cause defense, determining that the plaintiff’s instruction to stop lifting was consistent with established company practice.
- Jacober v Madan2026 NY Slip Op 05911
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims, finding that the complaint failed to plead fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation with sufficient particularity and that the transaction was not consumer-oriented under General Business Law § 349. Consequently, the claim against MassMutual based on respondeat superior also failed because the underlying claims against the brokers were properly dismissed.
- Matter of J.J. (M.D.)2026 NY Slip Op 05910
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s summary judgment finding that the mother neglected the children by behaving aggressively and waving a lighter near an oxygen tank in their presence. The court also held that the change of permanency goal to adoption was not properly before the court or was moot, and found no basis to disturb the best interest determination.
- Iken v Bohemian Brethren Presbyt. Church2026 NY Slip Op 05909
The Appellate Division affirmed a jury verdict awarding damages to a tenant for a landlord’s breach of lease duties to clear building violations and install a fire alarm system, which prevented the tenant from operating a preschool. The court rejected the landlord’s arguments that the rent abatement was the exclusive remedy and that the lost profits were speculative or barred by a lease provision limiting recovery to the building’s estate.
- Ho v Star Contrs., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05908
The court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs on their breach of contract claim, finding that the defendants repudiated the contract by demanding additional payment and abandoning the project. Additionally, the court reversed the lower court’s decision to preclude plaintiffs from testifying at trial, deeming the sanction an improvident exercise of discretion.
- Goldberg v Rozenberg2026 NY Slip Op 05907
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, holding that the allegedly defamatory statements were protected by the absolute litigation privilege because they were made in the course of litigation and were pertinent to the proceedings. The court further held that the plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress and that dismissal with prejudice was proper because the plaintiff did not request leave to amend.
- Matter of C.J.C. (O.G.)2026 NY Slip Op 05906
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the mother’s parental rights, finding that clear and convincing evidence established her mental illness prevented her from caring for the child. The court held that the expert’s opinion was competent despite the lack of direct observation of the mother-child interaction or recent medical records.
- De Souza v 4720 Third Ave LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05905
The court granted the plaintiff partial summary judgment on his Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding that he fell from an unsecured ladder and that his alleged negligence did not bar recovery. The court dismissed the plaintiff’s Labor Law § 241(6) claim as academic in light of the summary judgment determination on the § 240(1) claim.
- Castleman v Interactive Brokers LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05904
The in pari delicto doctrine bars a federal equity receiver from suing a third party for negligence or aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty because the receiver stands in the shoes of the wrongdoing corporation. The adverse interest exception does not apply because the wrongdoer was the sole owner of the entity at the time of the misconduct.
- C.P. v D.M.2026 NY Slip Op 05903
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s award of interim post-judgment counsel fees because the record lacked a required determination that the defendant was the less monied spouse. Additionally, the court vacated the order requiring the plaintiff to pay fifty percent of the forensic evaluator’s retainer, finding no substantially changed circumstances to justify the expense.
- Cutter v Bayard’s Ale House2026 NY Slip Op 05902
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment to an out-of-possession landlord because the lease granted a right of reentry for repairs and the plaintiff raised factual issues regarding specific statutory design safety violations. Additionally, the landlord’s cross-claim for contractual indemnification was properly denied because the tenant’s liability had not yet been established to trigger the indemnification duty.
- Alterman v Alterman2026 NY Slip Op 05901
The Supreme Court properly awarded a charging lien to the law firm because the defendant failed to demonstrate attorney misconduct or timely object to the fees. The court also correctly retained jurisdiction to determine the lien despite the husband’s death because the defendant’s right to a distributive award had already vested.
- Promise Homes Co. LLC v Promise Homes Inv., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 51706[U]
The court denied the defendant’s motion to stay the breach of contract action because the pending California lawsuit involved different legal entities and separate promissory notes, meaning the proceedings did not share common questions of law or fact. The court further determined that a stay would inordinately delay justice given that no discovery had occurred over a year after the complaint was filed.
October 9, 2026
- People v Reynolds2026 NY Slip Op 05894
The court affirmed the convictions, finding that the search warrants satisfied the Aguilar-Spinelli test for probable cause despite the defendant’s hearsay objections. Additionally, the court determined that the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal in the second appeal was invalid, though his specific challenges to the indictment were unpreserved.
- People v Washington2026 NY Slip Op 05893
The court held that police officers executing a search warrant for a vehicle may lawfully detain occupants for a reasonable period to ensure officer safety and prevent flight. Consequently, the suppression of the firearm recovered during a pat-frisk of the defendant was properly denied.
- People v Quashawn C.2026 NY Slip Op 05892
The court reversed the judgment and vacated the guilty plea because the trial court abused its discretion in denying the removal of the adolescent offender’s case to Family Court. The People’s motion to prevent removal failed to meet statutory requirements for sworn facts based on personal knowledge and did not establish the requisite extraordinary circumstances.
- People v Hemingway2026 NY Slip Op 05891
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, finding no abuse of discretion and rejecting the argument that the lower court considered the wrong plea transcript. Additionally, the court held that it was not required to state on the record its specific reasons for denying the defendant’s request for youthful offender treatment.
- Matter of Farley2026 NY Slip Op 05890
The appeal is dismissed because no appeal lies as of right from an order entered sua sponte that did not decide a motion made upon notice. The court declined to treat the notice of appeal as an application for leave to appeal.
- Caswell v New York State United Teachers2026 NY Slip Op 05889
The court held that a union membership agreement provision requiring the payment of dues until the start of the annual revocation window is not an unenforceable penalty provision. The court affirmed that the plaintiff remained obligated to pay dues until the window period began, rejecting the claim that the provision was grossly disproportionate to actual damages.
- People v Sherman2026 NY Slip Op 05888
The court affirmed the conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. However, the sentence was vacated and the matter remitted for resentencing because the trial court failed to follow the mandatory statutory procedures for sentencing a persistent violent felony offender.
- People v Wallace2026 NY Slip Op 05887
The court affirmed the judgment, finding that the defendant’s oral waiver of the right to appeal was valid and that his claims regarding a Brady violation and sentencing were forfeited or unpreserved. The court further determined that the defendant received meaningful representation and that the valid appeal waiver encompassed his challenge to the severity of the sentence.
- Matter of Cvetkovic v New York State Dept. of Health2026 NY Slip Op 05886
The court affirmed the Department of Health’s determination that an agency is not required to sua sponte evaluate an applicant for an undue hardship waiver if not requested, and that the waiver’s effective date is limited to three months prior to the application date. The court further held that the agency’s failure to send specific notices did not violate due process because the petitioner suffered no prejudice and had the opportunity to present evidence.
- People v Robinson2026 NY Slip Op 05885
The court affirmed the convictions, finding sufficient evidence to establish the defendant’s liability as an accessory based on her shared intent and assistance in the principal’s actions. The court also rejected the defendant’s arguments regarding the weight of the evidence, the admissibility of expert testimony on slang, and the applicability of the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act.
- People v Cooper2026 NY Slip Op 05884
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the victims’ testimony regarding multiple instances of sexual contact was relevant to the endangering the welfare of a child charges and did not constitute improper evidence of uncharged bad acts. The court further determined that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence and that the sentence was not unduly harsh, though it corrected a clerical error regarding the concurrency of the sentences.
- Wilmington Trust, N.A. v Stradtman Park, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05883
The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s denial of duplicative interest and its reduction of attorneys’ fees, finding that the plaintiff failed to establish the reasonableness of its requested rates and that the default rate interest rendered the note rate interest duplicative.
- Matter of Edholm v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs. Erie 1 BOCES2026 NY Slip Op 05882
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim, finding that the respondents had actual knowledge of the claim’s essential facts within the statutory period and would not be substantially prejudiced by the delay. The notice of claim was deemed timely served nunc pro tunc.
- Fuller v City of Buffalo2026 NY Slip Op 05881
The court affirmed summary judgment in favor of the City defendants, determining that probable cause existed for the plaintiff’s arrest based on witness statements and officer testimony. Consequently, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, and the claims for false arrest, malicious prosecution, and abuse of process were properly dismissed.
- Matter of Hayes v Porter2026 NY Slip Op 05880
The court affirmed the Family Court’s order denying the father parenting time, finding that the decision was supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record regarding the strained relationship and the father’s lack of accountability. The court further held that ordering the father’s substantial compliance with intensive counseling as a condition for future modification petitions was not an improper prerequisite to visitation.
- People v Thomas2026 NY Slip Op 05879
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying an adjournment and that defense counsel provided meaningful representation. The court further determined that the evidence of intent to sell was legally sufficient and supported by the weight of the evidence.
- People v Steele2026 NY Slip Op 05878
The court modified the judgment by reducing the conviction of predatory sexual assault against a child to attempted rape in the first degree due to insufficient evidence of penetration. Additionally, the court reversed the conviction for criminal sexual act in the third degree and dismissed that count because the evidence was legally insufficient to support the specific conduct alleged in the indictment.
- Matter of Buchholz v Trombley2026 NY Slip Op 05876
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s petition to modify custody and visitation, finding that the lower court’s best interests determination was supported by a sound and substantial basis in the record. The court also held that the mother’s claim of judicial bias was unpreserved because she failed to move for recusal.
- Matter of Anaya P. (Michael P.)2026 NY Slip Op 05875
The Family Court did not err in giving collateral estoppel effect to the respondent’s criminal conviction for sexual offenses in the subsequent Family Court Act article 10 proceedings. The court affirmed the determination that the respondent abused the children, rejecting the argument that the timing of the proceedings prevented the application of collateral estoppel.
- Falzano v Glazer2026 NY Slip Op 05873
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the unambiguous legal description in the 1989 deed conclusively established that the plaintiff had no ownership interest in the disputed right-of-way segment. The court further held that the plaintiff’s claim of unilateral mistake was insufficient to warrant reformation of the deed absent allegations of fraud.
- Jenkins v City of Utica2026 NY Slip Op 05872
The court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the complaint regarding permanent and significant limitation of use, finding that the plaintiff’s injuries were preexisting and unsupported by objective evidence. However, the court modified the order to reinstate the complaint regarding the 90/180-day category of serious injury because the defendants failed to meet their initial burden of proof on that specific category.
- Kijanka v Orleans Community Health2026 NY Slip Op 05871
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment because the defendants failed to meet their initial burden of showing the plaintiff could not identify the cause of her fall. The court found that the plaintiff’s deposition testimony clearly identified a specific pothole as the cause, precluding the claim that her account was speculative.
- Edworthy v Village of Whitesboro2026 NY Slip Op 05870
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the individual defendant because the plaintiff improperly raised a public nuisance theory for the first time in opposition to a summary judgment motion. The court held that a bill of particulars cannot be used to allege a new theory of liability that was not originally asserted in the complaint.
- Chen Dongwu v New York City Regional Ctr. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 51697[U]
The court granted summary judgment dismissing all remaining claims, holding that plaintiffs failed to establish justifiable reliance or injury for fraud because they received green cards and signed agreements acknowledging receipt of offering materials. Additionally, the court found that the manager’s decisions regarding fee payments and collateral sales were protected by the business judgment rule as they were made in good faith and conflicts of interest were disclosed.
- LW Holdco V LLC v Kelly Puls, MARK HANEY, CHRIS LYSTER2026 NY Slip Op 51688[U]
The court granted the motion to seal specific exhibits containing sensitive proprietary information, such as loan agreements and business emails, finding that good cause existed to protect the plaintiff’s competitive edge. However, the court denied the request to seal the pleadings and affidavits, determining that no legitimate basis was shown to restrict public access to those core judicial documents.
October 8, 2026
- Wims v River Park Bronx Apts., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05869
The court affirmed summary judgment for the plaintiff, finding that the defendants had actual notice of a wall leak and failed to properly remedy the condition. The court rejected the defendants’ argument that the plaintiff’s prior blocking of access proximately caused the injury, noting that the plaintiff had vacated the apartment to allow access.
- Vinasco v Kuzam2026 NY Slip Op 05868
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint, finding that defendants established prima facie that the plaintiff did not suffer a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102(d). The court held that the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact because her medical records were unaffirmed and she failed to offer an expert opinion to the contrary.
- Robles v Fordham Valentine Assoc. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05867
The court modified the lower court’s order to grant summary judgment dismissing the cross-claim for contribution and common-law indemnification as abandoned, while affirming the denial of summary judgment on the contractual indemnification claim. The court found that factual issues remained regarding whether the plaintiff’s injury arose out of the carpentry work, potentially triggering the indemnification clause.
- People v Gram2026 NY Slip Op 05861
The conviction is affirmed because the court providently exercised its discretion in rejecting the plea agreement, despite finding the waiver of the right to appeal invalid due to defects in the oral colloquy. The defendant’s due process claim regarding the plea violation inquiry was unpreserved and rejected on the merits.
- M.P. v Cosby2026 NY Slip Op 05859
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of a motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for negligent hiring, retention, and supervision against the employer. The complaint did not allege that the employer’s property or resources were used to commit the tortious acts, but rather only to facilitate the initial meeting and grooming process.
- Mt. Arlington BH Invs. v Mt. Arlington Equity Invs. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05858
The Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff established entitlement under CPLR 3213 by submitting the executed note and evidence of default. The court rejected the defendants’ claim that the loan was never disbursed, noting that the note’s language of ‘for value received’ undermined their speculation.
- Mandart v Small Bone Innovations, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05857
The Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to extend the note of issue deadline, finding that the lower court improvidently exercised its discretion. The court determined that the plaintiff established good cause for the extension due to delays in discovery that were not willful but resulted from legitimate difficulties and the defendant’s own actions.
- Malina v 158 Mgt. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05856
The court affirmed the summary judgment declaring the apartment rent stabilized because the defendants failed to properly deregulate the unit and could not establish a triable issue of fact regarding individual apartment improvements. The legal regulated rent was set at the last reliable registered stabilized rent due to the defendants’ failure to file proper and timely registrations.
- Kapitus Servicing, Inc. v Southern Source, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05855
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate a default judgment, finding that defendants had actual notice of the action despite potential notary defects. Additionally, the court held that defendants failed to establish a usury defense because they did not prove the underlying agreement was a loan with a finite term.
- Iberdrola Energy Projects v Oaktree Capital Mgt., L.P.2026 NY Slip Op 05854
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s fraud claims because the plaintiff failed to plead detrimental reliance on misrepresentations collateral to the contract, as the alleged inducement involved pre-existing contractual obligations. Additionally, the plaintiff’s renewed challenges to the enforceability of the work-pending-dispute and nonrecourse provisions were barred by the law of the case doctrine.
- Matter of T.G. (T.G.)2026 NY Slip Op 05852
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order denying the mother’s application for the return of her children pending a neglect fact-finding hearing. The court found that leaving the children alone for two hours posed an imminent risk to their life or health that could not be mitigated by reasonable efforts.
- City of New York v Exxon Mobil Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05851
The court affirmed the dismissal of the City’s claims, holding that the alleged product greenwashing statements were not deceptive because they were comparative and the public is already aware that fossil fuels contribute to climate change. Additionally, the corporate greenwashing claims failed because the statements were not made in connection with the sale or offering for sale of consumer goods or services, which is required under the City’s Consumer Protection Law.
- Chen v Chen2026 NY Slip Op 05850
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of a final order of protection, finding that the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant committed the family offenses of harassment and menacing. The court determined that the plaintiff’s partial recording did not corroborate her allegations of threats and that the defendant’s use of foul language did not rise to the level of the alleged offenses.
- C.S. v R.H.2026 NY Slip Op 05849
The Appellate Division held that assets held in valid, irrevocable trusts for third-party beneficiaries are not subject to equitable distribution, even if the grantor retains administrative powers or tax ownership. The court vacated the trial court’s inclusion of trust assets in the marital estate and remanded the case for recalculation of the distribution of non-trust assets.
- Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Edwards2026 NY Slip Op 05848
The plaintiff satisfied its prima facie burden of standing by annexing a note endorsed in blank to the complaint. The plaintiff also established compliance with RPAPL 1304 through an affidavit from a document verification specialist and attached USPS tracking records.
- Matter of Kuznetsov2026 NY Slip Op 05843
The court granted the attorney’s application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons. Consequently, his name was stricken from the roll of attorneys and he was ordered to desist from the practice of law in the state.
- In the Matter of Allan Baldwin Cruikshank Jr., an Attorney2026 NY Slip Op 05840
The court found the respondent attorney guilty of multiple violations of the Rules of Professional Conduct based on stipulated facts regarding neglect and failure to communicate. The court imposed a censure and required the attorney to submit semiannual lists of active cases to the court until further order.
- Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Balden)2026 NY Slip Op 05839
The court granted the respondent’s motion for reinstatement to the practice of law, finding by clear and convincing evidence that he met the requisite character and fitness standards. However, the reinstatement is subject to the condition that the respondent file an amended biennial registration statement and provide proof of compliance within 60 days.
- Matter of Crawford v Martuscello2026 NY Slip Op 05838
The Appellate Division confirmed the disciplinary determination finding the petitioner guilty of possessing contraband and smuggling, as the record contained substantial evidence to support the finding. The court held that the Hearing Officer properly resolved credibility issues regarding the petitioner’s testimony concerning the possession and description of the items.
- Matter of Alston v Martuscello2026 NY Slip Op 05834
The court confirmed the disciplinary determination finding the petitioner guilty of smuggling and possessing contraband, as the evidence provided substantial support for the guilt finding. The court held that minor inconsistencies in documentation and the petitioner’s speculative claims regarding tampered property were credibility issues for the Hearing Officer to resolve.
- Matter of Castillo Gonzalez v Expo Concrete, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05833
The Board’s refusal to address improper notice was not an abuse of discretion because the carrier failed to raise the issue or appeal the initial decision. The Board’s finding that the claimant did not violate Workers’ Compensation Law § 114-a was supported by substantial evidence, as the initial misrepresentation was not made to obtain benefits.
- Matter of New York State Police v Brian LL.2026 NY Slip Op 05832
The court reversed the lower court’s grant of an extreme risk protection order, holding that the petitioner failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent was likely to engage in conduct resulting in serious harm. The court found the evidence of an implied threat to be equivocal and contradictory, particularly given the respondent’s explanation that his statements referred to future litigation rather than violence.
- Matter of Mulligan v Moy Constr. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05831
The Appellate Division affirmed the Workers’ Compensation Board’s decision establishing a causal relationship between the claimant’s heart attack and his employment, noting that the carrier’s untimely notice of controversy barred it from disputing the claimant’s evidence. The court held that the Board’s factual finding, based on credible medical evidence and witness testimony regarding physical exertion, was supported by the record.
- People v Duplessis2026 NY Slip Op 05830
The Appellate Division reversed the conviction and remitted for a new trial because the County Court’s denial of the Batson challenge at step three was unsupported by the record. The court found that the trial court failed to adequately assess the prosecutor’s credibility and that the race-neutral explanation regarding the juror’s communication abilities was contradicted by the record.
- People v McCullough2026 NY Slip Op 05828
The court affirmed the judgment, finding that the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was valid and precluded his challenge to the severity of his enhanced sentence. The appellate court determined that the oral colloquy and written form demonstrated the defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to appeal.
- People v Allen2026 NY Slip Op 05827
The court held that probation conditions requiring the installation of an ignition interlock device are illegal when the conviction is based on drug use rather than an alcohol-related offense. Consequently, the court vacated the specific probation conditions mandating the device in this case.
October 7, 2026
- White v Titan Capital ID, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05826
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ breach of contract, fraudulent inducement, and tortious interference claims, finding no triable issues of fact. However, the court reversed the denial of attorneys’ fees, holding that the loan agreements unmistakably required the plaintiffs to indemnify the defendants for litigation costs.
- Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v Sharf2026 NY Slip Op 05825
The court held that a sua sponte order directing a plaintiff to file an affirmation or face dismissal is not a self-executing conditional order that automatically dismisses the action. Consequently, the plaintiff was entitled to vacate the order and restore the action to the active calendar without demonstrating a reasonable excuse or meritorious claim.
- USMMA Sailing Found., Inc. v Hilb Group of N.Y., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05824
The court reversed the lower court’s order and granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the General Business Law § 349 cause of action and the associated request for attorneys’ fees. The court determined that the plaintiff’s allegations described a private contract dispute unique to the parties rather than conduct with a broad impact on consumers at large.
- U.S. Bank National Association v Mahmood Ali, et al.2026 NY Slip Op 05823
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment and foreclosure because the plaintiff failed to establish compliance with HUD regulations requiring a meeting prior to debt acceleration. The court determined that the defendant’s affirmative defense regarding this regulatory failure was sufficiently pleaded under CPLR 3015(a).
- Shapiro v Kushnick-Carr2026 NY Slip Op 05822
The court held that the plaintiff’s defamation claim lacked a substantial basis in law because the defendant’s Google review constituted nonactionable pure opinion rather than factual assertion. Consequently, the action was deemed a SLAPP suit, warranting dismissal and an award of attorneys’ fees to the defendant.
- Rodriguez-Williams v John E. Andrus Mem., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05821
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, finding that the nursing home was entitled to immunity under the Emergency or Disaster Treatment Protection Act (EDTPA) because the statutory requirements were met. The court further held that the plaintiff’s allegations of gross negligence and pre-pandemic negligence were insufficient to survive a motion to dismiss as they were bare legal conclusions.
- Rodriguez v Duffy2026 NY Slip Op 05820
The court affirmed summary judgment for the plaintiff, holding that a rear-end collision establishes a prima facie case of negligence that the defendant failed to rebut. The defendant’s claim that a sudden stop by the lead vehicle caused the accident was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact given the foreseeable traffic conditions.
- RMX Foods, Inc. v Adelson2026 NY Slip Op 05819
The court affirmed the dismissal of the first and second causes of action, deeming them motions for declaratory judgment in favor of the defendants, because the stockholders agreement unambiguously permitted the Adelsons to retain their shares. The court also affirmed the dismissal of the third cause of action as time-barred under the statute of limitations for breach of contract.
- Rivera v Thomas2026 NY Slip Op 05818
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion for summary judgment because the defendant failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff could not identify the cause of her fall or that the defendant lacked notice of the hazardous condition. The court also held that the defendant’s argument regarding the triviality of the condition was improperly raised for the first time on appeal.
- Point 62, LLC v 192 E. Lindbergh, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05817
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the default judgment and order of reference. The court found that unique circumstances warranted vacating the judgment in the interests of justice because the defendant raised an affirmative defense that the State-owned property cannot be subject to tax foreclosure.
- People v Cuenca2026 NY Slip Op 05816
The court affirmed the designation of the defendant as a level two sex offender, finding that he failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that his response to treatment was exceptional or that other mitigating factors warranted a downward departure from the presumptive risk level.
- People v M.W.2026 NY Slip Op 05815
The Supreme Court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for resentencing under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act without a hearing because the defendant submitted sufficient corroborating evidence. The matter is remitted for a hearing to determine if the defendant should be resentenced in accordance with Penal Law § 60.12.
- People v Jorge2026 NY Slip Op 05811
The court reversed the conviction because the trial court failed to conduct a sufficient inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the defendant’s absence before proceeding with the trial. The record did not establish that the defendant deliberately absented himself to forfeit his right to be present, nor did it show the court considered all appropriate factors for proceeding in absentia.
- People v Gardner2026 NY Slip Op 05809
The court held that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Erlinger v United States does not require a jury to determine whether a defendant committed a predicate felony within the ten-year lookback period for second felony offender status. Instead, judges are constitutionally permitted to make these findings, including calculations regarding tolling periods, without a jury.
- People v Felton2026 NY Slip Op 05808
The appellate court vacated the duration of the order of protection because the trial court failed to credit the defendant for jail time served. The court remitted the matter for a new determination of the duration while keeping the order in effect pending that determination.
- People v Drago2026 NY Slip Op 05807
The court vacated the defendant’s petit larceny conviction and remanded for a new trial because the trial court failed to instruct the jury on the defense of a good faith claim of right. The majority determined that evidence, including prior removal of memorial items and a specific jury note, reasonably supported the defense, making the failure to charge it reversible error.
- People v Degraffenried2026 NY Slip Op 05806
The court affirmed the judgments, finding that the defendant violated a valid plea condition by contradicting his sworn admissions during a probation interview, which justified an enhanced sentence. Additionally, the court held that the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precluded review of the sentence’s excessiveness.
- People v Cammarata2026 NY Slip Op 05805
The court affirmed the conviction but modified the judgment to require that the sentences for concealment of a human corpse and tampering with physical evidence run concurrently. The court found that the People failed to establish that these convictions were separate and distinct offenses.
- People v Best2026 NY Slip Op 05804
The appellate court held that the defendant’s appeal waiver was invalid because it was discussed only after she admitted guilt, rather than as part of the plea agreement. Consequently, the court reviewed the excessive sentence claim but affirmed the judgment because the sentence was not excessive.
- People v Benson2026 NY Slip Op 05803
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that the evidence was legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court also held that the admission of testimony regarding a confidential informant did not violate the Confrontation Clause because it was used to show the officers’ state of mind rather than for its truth.
- NYCTL 1998-2 Trust v Phillip2026 NY Slip Op 05802
The court affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion to vacate prior orders, holding that the decedent’s death did not divest the court of jurisdiction because a default judgment had already been entered. Additionally, the court ruled that CPLR 317 is inapplicable to tax lien foreclosure actions and that the defendants failed to establish a basis for vacating the default under CPLR 2004 or 3012(d).
- Nunez v 672 Parkside, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05801
The court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims because the hazards were inherent to the work he was performing. Additionally, the court affirmed the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claims predicated on specific Industrial Code violations as the debris was an integral part of the work.
- Matter of Yeo v Yeo2026 NY Slip Op 05800
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the father’s motions to vacate default orders of fact-finding and protection. The court held that the father failed to establish a reasonable excuse for his failure to appear at the hearing, which was a necessary prerequisite to vacating the default.
- Matter of WA High Inv., LLC v Niblack2026 NY Slip Op 05799
The court held that the Department of Finance’s denial of a clerical error application was arbitrary and capricious because the property was vacant land zoned residential in Brooklyn, which is statutorily classified as tax class one. Consequently, the determination was annulled and the property was reclassified from tax class four to tax class one for the fiscal years 2017 to 2019.
- Matter of Grace-Monae Jesse W. (Valarie W.)2026 NY Slip Op 05798
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the mother’s parental rights, finding that the agency made diligent efforts to strengthen the parent-child relationship while the mother failed to plan for the child’s future. The court determined that a suspended judgment was inappropriate because the mother did not gain insight into the issues causing the child’s removal.
- Matter of Shea2026 NY Slip Op 05797
The court confirmed the Special Referee’s report sustaining charges of misappropriating client funds and engaging in conduct adversely reflecting on fitness as a lawyer. The respondent was suspended from the practice of law for two years, with the court rejecting his request for private discipline.
- Matter of Sanders v Ellis2026 NY Slip Op 05796
The court affirmed the dismissal of the putative grandmother’s petition, holding that while she established biological standing, equitable considerations did not warrant judicial intervention to grant visitation. The court found that the mother’s objections were well-founded and that the prior visitation order did not independently confer standing.
- Matter of Sanchez2026 NY Slip Op 05795
The court imposed reciprocal public censure on the respondent for professional misconduct, including failure to attend oral arguments and filing frivolous briefs, based on a prior public reprimand by the Second Circuit. The court determined that the foreign jurisdiction’s sanction was not inconsistent with New York standards and thus warranted the same level of discipline.
- Matter of Zacari S. (Messiah K.S.)2026 NY Slip Op 05794
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s finding of neglect, determining that the father’s commission of acts of domestic violence in the children’s presence and infliction of excessive corporal punishment impaired or endangered the children’s condition. The court noted that review was limited to contested matters due to the father’s default at the dispositional hearing.
- Matter of Michael S.2026 NY Slip Op 05793
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s adjudication of delinquency, holding that it was proper to proceed with the appearance in the absence of a parent after a reasonable and substantial effort was made to contact him. The court further determined that the appellant’s admissions and allocutions were valid and that certain challenges were unpreserved for appellate review.
- Matter of Rivicci v New York City Fire Dept.2026 NY Slip Op 05792
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s judgment, holding that the denial of the firefighter’s request for a religious accommodation from the vaccine mandate was not arbitrary or capricious because it would cause an undue hardship. The court further determined that the City’s process satisfied the cooperative dialogue requirements of the New York City Human Rights Law.
- Matter of Alexander M.R. (Manuel D. J. R.)2026 NY Slip Op 05790
The court affirmed the findings of sexual abuse and neglect but reversed the provision conditioning the father’s parental access on the child’s consent. The appellate court held that the Family Court improperly delegated its authority to determine parental access to the child.
- Matter of Auner M. (Pedro M.)2026 NY Slip Op 05789
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the father’s parental rights, finding that the agency exercised diligent efforts to strengthen the parent-child relationship while the father failed to plan for the child’s future. The court further determined that terminating rights and transferring custody for adoption was in the child’s best interests, rejecting the argument for a suspended judgment.
- Matter of Elmezzi2026 NY Slip Op 05788
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the petitioners’ claim for a constructive trust, finding that they failed to establish the elements of promise, reliance, and unjust enrichment by clear and convincing evidence. The court deferred to the Surrogate’s Court’s credibility determinations made during the nonjury trial.
- Matter of Defonce v Village of Port Chester2026 NY Slip Op 05786
The court affirmed the denial of the petition for leave to serve a late notice of claim because the petitioner failed to establish that the municipality had actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within 90 days. Additionally, the petitioner did not demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay or show that the delay would not substantially prejudice the municipality’s defense.
- Matter of Covington2026 NY Slip Op 05785
The Surrogate’s Court erred in dismissing the petition without a hearing because the verified allegations indicated the testator’s intent was not clear and unambiguous. The matter was remitted to allow the petitioner the opportunity to submit proof to establish the decedent’s intent.
- Matter of Hana-Aluna O. C.-M. (Kimberly C.)2026 NY Slip Op 05784
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order of disposition finding that the mother neglected the child by failing to provide adequate shelter and food. The court determined that the child’s out-of-court statements were sufficiently corroborated by witness testimony and records to support the finding of neglect.
- Matter of Mecca B. (Lashonda B.)2026 NY Slip Op 05783
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order terminating the mother’s parental rights on the ground of abandonment. The court held that a separate dispositional hearing is not required upon a finding of abandonment and that the lower court properly exercised its discretion in proceeding without one.
- Matter of Axelrod2026 NY Slip Op 05782
The court imposed reciprocal disbarment on the respondent based on his resignation from the Connecticut Bar during a pending grievance investigation. The court determined that the appropriate sanction for an attorney who submits a resignation during the pendency of a grievance investigation is disbarment.
- Matter of 106 Astoria Blvd., LLC v Niblack2026 NY Slip Op 05781
The court held that the Department of Finance committed an error of law by failing to classify four vacant lots in Queens as tax class one, as required for residentially zoned land outside Manhattan. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s decision to annul the determinations and direct the reclassification of the properties.
- Millender-Rubin v Rubin2026 NY Slip Op 05780
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order by denying the plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment awarding her exclusive possession of the cryopreserved embryos. The court determined that neither party established entitlement to judgment as a matter of law because they failed to identify which specific IVF cycle produced the disputed embryos or submit the corresponding cryopreservation agreement.
- Martinez v Equinox Holdings, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05779
The court affirmed the order compelling arbitration because the arbitration clause was separable from the substantive provisions of the membership agreement. The plaintiff’s argument that the agreement was void due to Health Club Act violations did not render the arbitration clause itself unenforceable.
- Maranov v Werney2026 NY Slip Op 05778
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s order, which had denied the plaintiff’s motion and granted the defendants’ motion based on technical non-compliance with word count limits. The court held that the Supreme Court should have overlooked these technical defects and remitted the matter for a new determination on the merits.
- Laignelet v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05777
The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the defendant established it did not own, occupy, control, or make special use of the property where the accident occurred. Consequently, the defendant owed no duty of care under common law or Labor Law sections 200, 240(1), and 241(6).
- Kawik v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.2026 NY Slip Op 05776
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the complaint against the City of New York, finding that the documentary evidence failed to conclusively establish that the City was an out-of-possession landlord without a duty to maintain the premises. The court determined that significant factual disputes remained regarding whether the City retained control or affirmatively created the defective condition that caused the plaintiff’s injury.
- Johnson v Payne2026 NY Slip Op 05775
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment on liability because the defendants raised triable issues of fact regarding a nonnegligent explanation for the rear-end collision. The court determined that the defendant driver’s affidavit alleging the plaintiff’s vehicle abruptly changed lanes and stopped suddenly was sufficient to rebut the prima facie case of negligence.
- Hyejun Cho v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05774
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the transit defendants, finding that they established prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by showing the plaintiff’s driver violated traffic laws and was the sole proximate cause of the accident. The surveillance video conclusively established that the bus driver had the right-of-way and insufficient time to react, negating any triable issue of fact regarding comparative negligence.
- Grinberg v Vistas of Port Jefferson, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05772
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, holding that the defendants demonstrated the vehicle was stolen and the key was hidden from sight, thereby rebutting the presumption of permissive use under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388(1). Consequently, the defendants were entitled to dismissal of the complaint against them as a matter of law.
- Gittler v Pinsky2026 NY Slip Op 05771
The Appellate Division reversed summary judgment for the anesthesiologist and his group because their expert relied on disputed facts and offered opinions outside their specialization. Conversely, the court affirmed summary judgment for the hospital because its expert established that an earlier diagnosis would not have changed the patient’s prognosis or outcome.
- K.G. v Barack Obama Sch. for Justice2026 NY Slip Op 05770
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, granting dismissal because the defendants established that the door was not in a defective condition and they lacked notice of any defect. The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact, as their expert reports were conclusory and the plaintiff could not identify the specific mechanism of injury without speculation.
- Fritz v Kurmel Brokerage, Ltd.2026 NY Slip Op 05769
The court affirmed summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s negligence and breach of contract claims against the insurance broker because the plaintiff failed to make a specific request for the additional coverage he later claimed was missing. The broker had no continuing duty to advise the client on updated coverage absent a specific request or a special relationship.
- Erkman Intl., Co., Ltd. v PepsiCo, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05768
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty and aiding and abetting fraud against PepsiCo. The court found that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege that PepsiCo provided substantial assistance, as mere inaction does not constitute substantial assistance without a direct fiduciary duty.
- Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v Fales2026 NY Slip Op 05767
The Appellate Division reversed the judgment of foreclosure and sale because the plaintiff failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for its delay in seeking a default judgment within one year of the defendant’s default. Consequently, the court granted the defendant’s cross-motion to dismiss the complaint as abandoned pursuant to CPLR 3215(c).
- Davis v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05766
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff failed to allege facts establishing a special duty or voluntary assumption of duty by the municipality. Consequently, the complaint was dismissed for failure to state a cause of action, and the plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment was denied.
- Citibank, N.A. v Sagastume2026 NY Slip Op 05765
The court vacated the foreclosure judgment and dismissed the complaint for lack of personal jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate due diligence in service of process. The process server did not make genuine inquiries about the defendant’s whereabouts before resorting to affix and mail service.
- Chance v Chance2026 NY Slip Op 05764
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment of divorce, holding that the father forfeited his right to assigned counsel due to egregious conduct and that the trial court properly denied his request for an adjournment. The court determined that review was limited to matters contested below because the judgment was entered upon the father’s default.
- Champion v Merlex Auto Group2026 NY Slip Op 05763
The court affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that the defendant waived its right to arbitrate by engaging in extensive litigation activities and delaying its request for arbitration for approximately 18 months. The court determined that the defendant’s conduct was inconsistent with an intent to arbitrate, thereby precluding the use of the courtroom as a convenient vestibule to the arbitration hall.
- Cammayo v 1AND8, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05762
The voluntary payment doctrine does not preclude a cause of action for damages alleging a violation of Arts and Cultural Affairs Law § 25.07(4) because the statute requires disclosure prior to ticket selection. The plaintiff has standing to sue based on the injury of paying an allegedly unlawful fee, and triable issues of fact exist regarding whether the fee disclosure was clear and conspicuous.
- Cambero-Minaya v 211 Schermerhorn Dev., LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05761
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to deny the defendants’ untimely cross-motion for summary judgment on common-law negligence and Labor Law §§ 200 and 240(1) claims, while affirming the dismissal of the Labor Law § 241(6) claim. The court also affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion to amend the bill of particulars, finding no extraordinary circumstances to justify the delay after discovery was completed.
- Bonilla v Village of Westbury2026 NY Slip Op 05760
The court affirmed the grant of summary judgment dismissing the complaint against the Village of Westbury because the Village established it lacked prior written notice of the sidewalk defect. The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the applicability of any exception to the written notice requirement.
- Bank of America, N.A. v Russell2026 NY Slip Op 05759
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the defendants’ motion to dismiss the foreclosure action as time-barred. The court determined that the defendants were equitably estopped from raising the statute of limitations defense because their misconduct, including false occupancy certifications, caused the plaintiff’s delay in filing suit.
- An v Long Is. Bd. of Realtors2026 NY Slip Op 05758
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of dismissal for the negligence, breach of fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment claims, finding that the plaintiffs’ allegations were based solely on contractual relationships or failed to establish necessary elements like justifiable reliance or consumer-oriented conduct. The court affirmed the dismissal of the fraud, conspiracy, and injurious falsehood claims, noting that the plaintiffs could not reasonably rely on the defendants’ representations and the injurious falsehood claim was time-barred.
- Alarcon v Otsego Mut. Fire Ins. Co.2026 NY Slip Op 05757
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s breach of contract claim and the entry of a declaratory judgment that the insurance policies were void ab initio. The insurer established that the plaintiff made a material misrepresentation by stating the property was a one-family dwelling when it was structurally a three-family dwelling, and the insurer would not have issued the policy had the correct information been disclosed.
- 710 E Elizabeth Ave, LLC, et al., appellants, v Jhong Kim, respondent.2026 NY Slip Op 05756
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s dismissal, reinstating the amended complaint and remitting the matter for judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. The court found that the defendant failed to prove he was acting as an agent for a disclosed principal, thereby establishing personal liability for the breach of the loan agreement.
- 21-55 45th Road, LLC v Altamirano2026 NY Slip Op 05755
The Appellate Division affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff in a mortgage foreclosure action, finding that the defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the cure of default. The court held that a dispute over the total amount of indebtedness does not preclude summary judgment on the foreclosure cause of action but is properly resolved by a referee.
- 448-452 W. 57 Assoc. LLC v Sposaro2026 NY Slip Op 51632[U]
The Appellate Term reversed the dismissal of a lease-expiration holdover petition, holding that a landlord’s failure to register a tenant with the DHCR does not legally prevent the deregulation of an apartment due to a high rent vacancy. The court determined that rent regulation coverage is a statutory right that cannot be created by waiver or estoppel, and remanded for a new trial to determine if the deregulation was legal and legitimate.
- People v Adams2026 NY Slip Op 51631[U]
The court held that while the defendant’s identity and DMV records are not suppressible fruits of an illegal seizure, the lower court failed to address the legality of the vehicle stop or the suppression of incriminating post-stop observations. Consequently, the appeal was held in abeyance and the matter remitted to Criminal Court for a suppression hearing.
October 6, 2026
- Matter of Group US Mgt. LLC v James2026 NY Slip Op 05754
The court affirmed the denial of a petition to quash a non-judicial subpoena, finding that the requested documents concerning out-of-state restaurants bore a reasonable relationship to the investigation due to the petitioner’s use of New York-based entities and addresses. The Attorney General was authorized to enforce state consumer protection laws on behalf of out-of-state residents where New York addresses were used to facilitate deceptive transactions.
- Wong v Wong2026 NY Slip Op 05753
The judgment was reversed and the matter remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly allowed evidence and argument regarding a prior owner’s status, which contradicted the law of the case. The court found that the late curative instructions were ineffective and that the improper evidence likely played a substantial role in the jury’s decision.
- Wiggins v State of N.Y. Mtge. Agency2026 NY Slip Op 05752
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s action seeking to unwind a foreclosure sale of cooperative shares, holding that such relief is unavailable once a sale has occurred under UCC article 9. This rule applies equally to residential and commercial properties, regardless of whether the purchaser was the defendant or a third party.
- Vasquez v Uber Tech. Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05751
The court affirmed the summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s claims because she failed to establish a serious injury as defined by Insurance Law § 5102(d). The plaintiff’s expert testimony was insufficient to raise an issue of fact regarding causation due to a significant delay in examination and failure to address contrary expert opinions.
- Santander Bank, N.A. v NY Business Holdings Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05750
The Appellate Division affirmed the grant of summary judgment for breach of lease and guaranty, finding the plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement and the defendants failed to raise triable issues of fact. The court also affirmed the denial of leave to amend the answer to assert a forgery defense, deeming the proposed amendment patently devoid of merit given the defendants’ payment history.
- Rifkin v Lubcher2026 NY Slip Op 05749
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to compel the production of specific billing worksheets, invoices, deposit slips, and a client list relevant to an accounting action. The court affirmed the denial of requests for documents not previously requested or deemed irrelevant to the accounting dispute.
- People v Adams2026 NY Slip Op 05745
The court modified the judgment to strike the probation condition requiring the defendant to pay a surcharge and fees, finding it not reasonably related to rehabilitation. The remainder of the judgment was affirmed, and the court declined to reduce the sentence despite an invalid waiver of appeal.
- People v O’Connor2026 NY Slip Op 05743
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s petition to modify his sex offender classification, finding that the conditions had not changed sufficiently to warrant a modification of his risk level three status. The court determined that the defendant’s mitigating factors were largely present at the initial adjudication and did not outweigh the seriousness of his underlying conviction and history of repeated sexual misconduct.
- People v Tolbert2026 NY Slip Op 05741
The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the defendant’s waiver of appeal was valid despite procedural irregularities and the omission of specific notice regarding appellate counsel. Consequently, the waiver foreclosed review of the excessive sentence claim and constitutional challenges to the probation conditions.
- People v Lantigua2026 NY Slip Op 05739
The conviction for unlawful surveillance in the second degree was affirmed because the evidence legally supported that the defendant acted surreptitiously and the victim was under clothing. The court also found no prosecutorial misconduct and no abuse of discretion in limiting impeachment evidence regarding the testifying officer.
- People v Gutierrez2026 NY Slip Op 05737
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence but modified the judgment to strike the probation condition requiring consent to searches of the defendant’s person, vehicle, or abode. The court found this specific condition was not reasonably related to the defendant’s rehabilitation, while upholding other probation conditions as reasonably necessary.
- People v Then2026 NY Slip Op 05736
The appellate court affirmed the defendant’s conviction for second-degree murder, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court rejected the defendant’s evidentiary and procedural claims, determining that any errors were either unpreserved or harmless given the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
- People v Robinson2026 NY Slip Op 05734
The court affirmed the defendant’s conviction for first-degree murder, finding that the circumstantial evidence was legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The court also upheld the trial court’s discretion in precluding third-party culpability evidence as speculative and inadmissible hearsay.
- Matter of B.R. (A.C.)2026 NY Slip Op 05733
The Supreme Court properly authorized the co-guardian to change beneficiary designations and reform LLC operating agreements to align with the incapacitated person’s prior estate plan, as permitted by Mental Hygiene Law § 81.21. The court rejected the argument that the statute is limited to lifetime transfers and found that the appellant failed to comply with the operating agreements’ requirements for continuing the business.
- Manewan v Huerta2026 NY Slip Op 05732
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of summary judgment, finding that the plaintiff’s expert was qualified to opine on the defendant surgeon’s handling of a biopsy and pathology report. The expert’s identification of specific departures from accepted medical practice, including the failure to communicate clinical presentation to the pathologist, raised triable issues of fact.
- Matter of Local 621, S.E.I.U. v New York City Dept. of Corr.2026 NY Slip Op 05731
The Appellate Division affirmed the annulment of the DOC’s determination but modified the judgment to deny the award of costs and attorneys’ fees. The court held that such fees are not authorized in a CPLR article 78 proceeding absent a specific statutory or contractual provision.
- Lackwood v Lackwood2026 NY Slip Op 05730
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision to grant a civil contempt motion without a hearing because the husband failed to raise a factual dispute regarding his inability to pay. The court also affirmed the denial of the husband’s order to show cause for assignment of counsel, noting that such an order was not appealable as of right and the lower court’s discretion was properly exercised.
- Komlan v Belisle2026 NY Slip Op 05729
The court affirmed the denial of the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment because the submitted surveillance video was not dispositive of the claims and failed to irrefutably demonstrate the defendants’ negligence. The plaintiff did not establish a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability.
- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v Parmesar2026 NY Slip Op 05728
The 2019 foreclosure action was untimely because the prior 2008 acceleration remained valid despite the 2008 action being a legal nullity. The 2019 dismissal was for lack of personal jurisdiction, precluding the application of savings provisions under CPLR 205(a) and 205-a.
- Jose v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05727
The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion to compel a deposition because the plaintiff failed to demonstrate the insufficiency of existing testimony or the necessity of the requested witness. Additionally, the court correctly quashed subpoenas for nonparties because the plaintiff failed to establish the relevance of their testimony, rendering the subpoenas tantamount to a fishing expedition.
- IKB Intl. S.A. v U.S. Bank, N.A.2026 NY Slip Op 05726
The court reinstated claims regarding disclosed noncompliance events of default and mortgage file defects, finding that issues of fact precluded summary judgment and that liquidation does not automatically bar repurchase enforcement claims. It also granted plaintiffs summary judgment on standing for specific contract claims while dismissing claims based on ratings downgrades that did not meet the required threshold.
- Haubold v Towers on the Park Condominium2026 NY Slip Op 05725
The court affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ claims for tortious interference and breach of fiduciary duty because they failed to identify any independent tortious conduct by the defendants. The enforcement of the plaintiffs’ agreement to obtain a new tax lot for their combined units did not constitute disparate treatment under the business judgment rule.
- Hanover v Speaker2026 NY Slip Op 05724
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s decision to issue conditional orders precluding evidence rather than striking the defendants’ answer. The court found that the defendants’ delays in producing insurance documents were not willful or contumacious, making the drastic remedy of striking the answer unwarranted.
- Gomez v Uber Tech., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05722
The Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment dismissing the complaint because the defendants established that the plaintiff’s alleged injuries were preexisting degenerative conditions not caused by the collision. The plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact regarding causation because his medical records were inadmissible and his treating physician did not examine him contemporaneously with the accident.
- Goldberg v Torim2026 NY Slip Op 05721
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to deny defendants’ motions for summary judgment except as to the direct cause of action for conversion against Leah Torim, finding that issues of fact precluded summary judgment on tax estoppel and vicarious liability claims. The court affirmed the dismissal of the breach of fiduciary duty claim but reversed the dismissal of the conversion claim due to triable issues regarding the plaintiff’s possessory interest in the proceeds.
- DLJ Mtge. Capital, Inc. v Mahadeo2026 NY Slip Op 05719
The court affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff established standing by attaching the original note to the certificate of merit. The defendant’s submission of a prior version of the note without allonges was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact regarding standing.
- Matter of C.B. (L.B.)2026 NY Slip Op 05718
The Family Court properly denied the parents’ motions to dismiss the neglect petition with prejudice because it could not do so without first conducting a fact-finding hearing to determine that intervention was not required. Additionally, the voluntary withdrawal of the petition by ACS did not mandate dismissal with prejudice in the absence of a showing that the petition was filed to harass or annoy respondents.
- Brice v Two Sigma Inv. Solutions, LP2026 NY Slip Op 05717
The appeal is dismissed as taken from a nonappealable order because the plaintiff did not oppose the motion to compel arbitration. Consequently, the plaintiff is not aggrieved by the Supreme Court’s granting of the motion and lacks standing to appeal.
- Matter of B.C. v M.C.2026 NY Slip Op 05716
The appeal was dismissed as moot because the order of protection expired by its own terms and the appellant failed to identify any permanent stigma. Additionally, the appellant was precluded from challenging the underlying allegations because the initial order was entered on default.
- Askins v Upstaging Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05715
The court granted summary judgment dismissing the plaintiff’s serious injury claims because the defendants established that the plaintiff’s injuries were caused by preexisting degenerative conditions rather than the accident. The plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact by not specifically addressing or ruling out these preexisting conditions in her expert’s opinion.
- Arnstein v Stein Saks, PLLC2026 NY Slip Op 05714
The Appellate Division affirmed the trial court’s issuance of a prefiling injunction enjoining the plaintiff from commencing new litigation without judicial permission. The court held that the trial court providently exercised its discretion and that the injunction is distinct from 22 NYCRR 130-1 sanctions, thus not requiring the specific written decision format mandated for frivolous conduct findings.
- Matter of Partia A. v Thierno D.2026 NY Slip Op 05713
The father’s decision to proceed pro se constituted a valid waiver of his right to counsel because he repeatedly chose to retain private counsel without requesting assigned counsel or demonstrating financial inability. The court properly denied further adjournments and affirmed the custody order, finding the waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
- 5 Beekman Property Owner, LLC et al. v Henick-Lane, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05712
The court affirmed the order requiring plaintiffs to return a settlement payment made by the defendant’s insurer based on a mistaken belief that a settlement had been reached. The court held that the voluntary payment doctrine did not apply because the insurer reserved rights and the payment was based on a mistake of material fact.
- Matter of 251 W. 74 Owners Corp. v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal2026 NY Slip Op 05711
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of the petition, holding that the petitioner lacked third-party standing because it failed to demonstrate that the sponsor could not challenge the rent reduction order itself. Additionally, the court found no due process violation because the managing agent’s address was properly listed in DHCR records and designated for service.
- Webb v Infusion Capital Group LLC2026 NY Slip Op 51679[U]
The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiff, as an assignee of a foreign LLC’s claims, had standing to proceed pro se. The court held that a valid assignment of claims to a natural person is a permissible tactic to avoid the statutory prohibition against corporations appearing without counsel.
October 5, 2026
- Kanter’s Realty Assoc., LLC v Milgram2026 NY Slip Op 51604[U]
The court affirmed the denial of the landlord’s motion for summary judgment, finding that triable issues of fact existed regarding the tenants’ illusory tenancy defense. The court modified the lower court’s order to extend the discovery period for document production to cover the extended period of alleged residence.
- Casita, L.P. v Maplewood Equity Partners (Offshore) Ltd.2026 NY Slip Op 51676[U]
The court ordered defendants to produce responsive documents to plaintiff’s 49 demands, rejecting the argument that discovery should be limited at this early stage. The court held that defendants cannot unilaterally limit the scope of permissible discovery before a final determination on the merits.
October 2, 2026
- Matter of Vitucci v Ford2026 NY Slip Op 05682
The court held that the proceeding to validate the certificate of nomination was timely because it was commenced within three business days of the Board’s determination. Additionally, the court determined that Election Law § 6-148(4) is inapplicable to the certificate of nomination because the vacancy was created by a legislative act rather than a vacancy in a preexisting nomination or designation.
- Matter of Madison v Petteway2026 NY Slip Op 05664
The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Family Court’s order adjudging the respondent to have sole legal and primary physical custody of the subject child. The decision was issued without costs in a proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6.
- People v Clegg2026 NY Slip Op 05663
The court held that the defendant was in custody during the interview at the parole office because a reasonable person would not have felt free to leave, requiring Miranda warnings that were not given. Consequently, the defendant’s statements and the derived cell phone call log were suppressed, and the guilty plea was vacated.
- People v Rodgers2026 NY Slip Op 05657
The court affirmed the conviction for assault in the first degree, rejecting the defendant’s argument that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. The appellate court determined that the jury’s credibility determinations regarding the victim’s testimony were entitled to great deference, particularly given the victim’s explanation for prior recantations.
- Smith v State of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05653
The Court of Claims’ judgment was reversed and the claim dismissed because the claimant failed to present expert medical evidence. The court determined that the alleged medical negligence was by definition a medical malpractice claim rather than simple negligence, requiring expert opinion.
- People v Davis2026 NY Slip Op 05650
The conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree was affirmed because the evidence established the defendant possessed a magazine holding 13 rounds, exceeding the statutory limit. The court held that the People were not required to prove the defendant was aware of the 2022 amendment or that DCJS conducted a sufficient outreach campaign.
- People v Murray2026 NY Slip Op 05642
The court affirmed the convictions for criminal possession of a weapon and controlled substances, but reversed the convictions for criminal possession of a firearm as inclusory concurrent counts. Additionally, the court modified the sentence to reduce the period of postrelease supervision to one year to comply with statutory limits.
- Weiss v D&D Partners Rochester, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05640
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment, finding that triable issues of fact existed regarding whether the speed bump constituted a dangerous condition, the cause of the plaintiff’s fall, and whether the hazard was open and obvious. The court also held that the assumption of the risk doctrine was inapplicable to the premises liability claim.
- Khan v Khan2026 NY Slip Op 05639
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint because the defendant’s evidence conclusively established that there was no fraudulent misrepresentation or omission regarding the value of the medical practice. Furthermore, the court found that the plaintiff could not have justifiably relied on any alleged fraud because she waived further discovery after being notified of a potential transaction.
- Stang v Shenoy2026 NY Slip Op 05638
The court vacated the lower court’s order prohibiting questions regarding a specific medical report and the defendant’s health condition relative to it, finding that such limitations abused discretion by potentially precluding relevant testimony. The court determined that the report was not protected by statutory privilege because it had been disclosed to the public in a separate action.
- Matter of Niagara Metals, LLC v City of Buffalo Zoning Bd. of Appeals2026 NY Slip Op 05636
The court confirmed the Zoning Board of Appeals’ determination that the nonconforming use of the property as a scrap yard was not abandoned, finding that ongoing remediation constituted a continuation of the use. The court also affirmed that no use variance was required for the new operator to engage in similar operations.
- Matter of Masci v Romero2026 NY Slip Op 05632
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order granting the father sole legal and primary physical custody, finding that the mother’s interference with visitation established a sufficient change in circumstances. The court also determined that the lower court appropriately considered postpetition conduct when evaluating the child’s best interests.
- People v Ivery2026 NY Slip Op 05628
The court affirmed the conviction for second-degree murder, finding that the jury could reasonably conclude the defendant did not act in self-defense because the victim was not using deadly physical force and the defendant had the opportunity to retreat. The court also affirmed the denial of challenges for cause to two prospective jurors, noting their statements did not indicate a state of mind likely to preclude an impartial verdict.
- People v Littler2026 NY Slip Op 05627
The court affirmed the judgment, concluding that the sentence was not unduly harsh or severe even assuming the appeal waiver was invalid. The court also held that the defendant failed to preserve his challenge to the restitution amount by not objecting at sentencing.
- People v Gates2026 NY Slip Op 05625
The court affirmed the judgment, rejecting the defendant’s claims that the trial court failed to conduct a sufficient inquiry into his complaints about defense counsel and that it erred in failing to sua sponte order a competency examination. The appellate court found that the defendant’s objections were vague and generic, and that his history of mental health issues did not, by itself, call into question his competence.
- Matter of Antonetti v City of Rochester2026 NY Slip Op 05624
The court annulled the termination of the petitioner’s employment because the hearing officer lacked jurisdiction due to the absence of a written delegation of authority. Additionally, the final decision-maker was required to recuse herself from the process after initiating charges and testifying at the hearing.
- Agway Energy Servs., LLC v Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 05621
The court held that the Public Service Commission has primary jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s claims regarding billing procedures and EDI protocols. However, the lower court abused its discretion by dismissing the complaint without prejudice instead of staying the action, as the plaintiff sought monetary damages subject to the statute of limitations.
- People v Golden2026 NY Slip Op 05620
The court affirmed the conviction, rejecting the defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court determined that trial counsel’s failure to challenge the constitutionality of the weapon possession statute in light of Bruen was not deficient because such a motion would have had little or no chance of success.
October 1, 2026
- Matter of Z. J.W. (Toria W.)2026 NY Slip Op 05616
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the mother’s parental rights based on a finding of permanent neglect, supported by clear and convincing evidence. The court determined that the agency made diligent efforts to strengthen the parental relationship, but the mother failed to plan for the child’s future and did not gain insight into the problems leading to removal.
- Matter of J.M.W. (Kassandra F.W.)2026 NY Slip Op 05615
The Appellate Division affirmed the termination of the mother’s parental rights based on a finding of permanent neglect, supported by clear and convincing evidence that she failed to plan for the child’s future despite the agency’s diligent efforts. The court found that the mother’s failure to attend the majority of scheduled visits and therapy sessions, combined with her lack of credible testimony, justified the Family Court’s decision.
- Sutton v 76 St. Nicholas Place, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05614
The court modified the lower court’s order to substitute the purchaser as the defendant, instead ordering that the purchaser be joined as an additional defendant. This modification was necessary because full substitution would prejudice plaintiffs by introducing a knowledge defense that could diminish their potential damages.
- Matter of ReductoNox Corp. (Siemens Energy, Inc.)2026 NY Slip Op 05613
The Appellate Division affirmed the confirmation of an arbitration award, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the arbitral panel manifestly disregarded the law in its interpretation of contract terms and assessment of damages. The court held that the panel’s factual findings regarding the nature of the technology and the lack of proof for fraudulent inducement were binding.
- Picard v Cosby2026 NY Slip Op 05612
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of the motion to dismiss, holding that the plaintiff failed to allege a sufficient nexus between the defendant company’s resources and the alleged assaults. The majority determined that merely using the studio to impress the plaintiff did not constitute using employer resources to commit independently tortious conduct.
- Petrolawicz v Ando Realty LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05611
A tenant may challenge the deregulated status of their apartment at any time during their tenancy, and the rent history may be examined beyond four years. The defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment was denied because the submitted affidavit failed to authenticate the documents as admissible business records.
- People v Schiff2026 NY Slip Op 05610
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding that the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the court failed to adequately explain the nature of the waiver and confirm the defendant’s understanding. However, the court declined to reach the defendant’s other claims regarding sentencing and plea conditions because they were not preserved for appellate review.
- People v Keyshawn F.2026 NY Slip Op 05608
The court affirmed the conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, rejecting the defendant’s facial Second Amendment challenge to New York’s gun licensing regime. The court held that the defendant’s as-applied challenge based on age was unpreserved and alternatively failed on the merits.
- People v Luke2026 NY Slip Op 05604
The appellate court affirmed the conviction for burglary in the third degree, finding that the trial court properly denied the Batson challenge and that the evidence supported the jury’s verdict. The court also determined that the trial court did not err in denying the motion to compel production of defense counsel’s handwritten notes, which were protected by work-product privilege.
- Osman v Pelofi2026 NY Slip Op 05602
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the husband’s motion for discovery and forensic examination, finding that he failed to establish a triable issue of fact regarding the wife’s access to his emails. The court also rejected his due process and spoliation claims, noting that he was afforded a full opportunity to litigate and that the wife voluntarily produced her device for examination.
- Matter of Smerling2026 NY Slip Op 05601
The court granted the Attorney Grievance Committee’s motion for reciprocal discipline, disbaring the respondent immediately based on his felony convictions and resignation from the Massachusetts Bar. The court found that the respondent could not raise any valid defenses under 22 NYCRR 1240.13(b) and that disbarment was the appropriate sanction commensurate with the foreign jurisdiction’s discipline.
- M.J., etc., et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v City of New York, et al., Defendants-Appellants.2026 NY Slip Op 05600
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment as untimely because they failed to demonstrate good cause for a 62-day delay in filing the renewed motion after the court-ordered electronic conversion. The court held that the initial timely motion did not excuse the subsequent delay, as it had been denied without prejudice, leaving no pending motion.
- Matter of Knights v City Univ. of N.Y.2026 NY Slip Op 05599
The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition because it was time-barred under the four-month statute of limitations. Additionally, the termination claims were barred by res judicata, and the decision not to interview the petitioner was not arbitrary or capricious.
- Hakim v Hakim2026 NY Slip Op 05598
The court affirmed the dismissal of a counterclaim on a promissory note because it was based on past consideration without an explicit written recitation or valid antecedent obligation. Additionally, the court upheld the grant of an accounting for a partnership dissolution, noting that a fiduciary relationship exists between partners and an accounting is the proper method for winding up a partnership.
- Garcia v Baco Enters., Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05597
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of summary judgment for the out-of-possession landlord because the lease language raised a question of fact regarding assumed repair obligations. The court also barred consideration of a proximate cause argument raised for the first time in reply papers.
- Ellis v State of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05596
The court affirmed the dismissal of the wrongful death claim because the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the State owed a special duty to the infant. The State’s inaction or omissions in its government oversight functions, rather than affirmative actions placing the child in harm’s way, were insufficient to establish liability.
- Discover Property & Casualty Company v National Football League2026 NY Slip Op 05595
The court held that NFL football does not constitute a ‘product’ under the Products Completed Operations Hazard (PCOH) definition, thereby excluding the claims from the PCOH aggregate limit. Additionally, the court determined that each player’s injury constitutes a separate occurrence, meaning the AGLIC excess policy was not triggered, and found the NFL’s settlement reasonable while rejecting the ‘no loss’ defense based on club indemnification.
- Deustche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v White2026 NY Slip Op 05594
A defendant who transferred their interest in the subject property by deed is divested of standing to defend a foreclosure action. Because the defendant was not an obligor on the underlying note and did not assume the debt, the broad reservation of deficiency rights did not create sufficient standing.
- Delgado v 27-51 Jackson Ave LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05593
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of a motion to amend pleadings to add fraud claims, finding the proposed amendment lacked merit. The court determined that the existence of other unproven fraud lawsuits and shared addresses with other claimants were insufficient to establish a misrepresentation of fact with the required particularity.
- Matter of Aberbach v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision2026 NY Slip Op 05592
The court affirmed the denial of the petitioner’s motion to vacate a DOCCS determination, holding that judicial review of agency action following remittal is available only through a new Article 78 proceeding. The court rejected the argument that the original proceeding could be used to review new agency action taken after remittal.
- 62 Wooster, LLC v TML N.Y. Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05591
The court affirmed the dismissal of claims against guarantors, holding that the guaranties were ambiguous due to conflicting surrender and good guy clauses. Applying the contra proferentem rule against the landlord who drafted the documents, the court determined the guarantors’ liability terminated upon the tenant’s physical surrender of the premises.
- Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Nebashi)2026 NY Slip Op 05589
The court granted the respondent’s motion for reinstatement after determining by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent complied with the suspension order and possesses the requisite character and fitness to practice law. The court further found that reinstatement would be in the public interest, thereby reinstating the respondent as an attorney and counselor-at-law effective immediately.
- Matter of Larson2026 NY Slip Op 05587
The court denied the attorney’s application for nondisciplinary resignation because she was currently suspended for failing to comply with registration obligations. The court held that reinstatement to practice is a necessary prerequisite for any future application for leave to resign for nondisciplinary reasons.
- In the Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. Attorney Grievance Committee for the Third Judicial Department, Petitioner; Joseph Brantley Durrett III, Respondent.2026 NY Slip Op 05585
The court granted the respondent’s motion for reinstatement to the practice of law. The court determined by clear and convincing evidence that the respondent complied with suspension orders, possessed requisite character and fitness, and that reinstatement served the public interest.
- People ex rel. Elmore v McCarthy2026 NY Slip Op 05582
Habeas corpus relief is not an appropriate remedy for asserting claims that were or could have been raised on direct appeal or in a CPL article 440 motion, even if they are jurisdictional in nature. The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition because the petitioner’s jurisdictional challenge could have been raised in prior proceedings.
- Matter of Ashlee NN. v Todd OO.2026 NY Slip Op 05581
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the family offense petition, finding that the petitioner failed to meet her burden of proving harassment by a fair preponderance of the evidence. The court deferred to the Family Court’s credibility determinations and noted that the respondent’s admitted phone calls lacked sufficient context to establish the requisite offense.
- Matter of Marcello OO. v Jayne PP.2026 NY Slip Op 05580
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order suspending the father’s contact with the children and directing him to complete parenting classes and evaluations. The court found that the father’s persistent conduct, including involving the children in litigation and disparaging the mother, demonstrated that continued contact would be detrimental to the children’s welfare.
- Dougal v Kindlon2026 NY Slip Op 05579
The appeal is dismissed because no appealable paper exists, as the City Court’s oral decision was never reduced to a judgment or final order. The subsequent order denying a motion to compel judgment does not constitute a final judgment subject to appeal.
- Matter of Marcello OO. v Jayne PP.2026 NY Slip Op 05578
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s dismissal of the father’s contempt petitions, finding he failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the mother violated the custody and visitation orders. The court determined the father’s testimony lacked specificity regarding missed visits and calls, and he did not demonstrate that the mother’s conduct intentionally impaired his rights.
- Cullinan v Cullinan2026 NY Slip Op 05577
The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court’s unequal equitable distribution award and extended maintenance duration, finding that the husband’s use of marital income to acquire separate property created significant financial inequity. The court determined that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in deviating from standard guidelines to protect the wife’s financial interests given the disparity in resources and the husband’s financial planning.
- People v Maldonado2026 NY Slip Op 05574
The court affirmed the convictions for attempted murder in the second degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree, finding the evidence legally sufficient and supported by the weight of the evidence. Although the admission of Molineux evidence regarding a prior shooting was error, the court deemed it harmless given the overwhelming other evidence of defendant’s identity and intent.
- People v Miller2026 NY Slip Op 05573
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the People satisfied their disclosure obligations under CPL 245.20 by providing a summary of the detective’s disciplinary history rather than full files, as the omitted details did not tend to impeach credibility. Additionally, the court found that the defendant’s statements were voluntary despite the use of leg restraints, and that the trial court properly determined the defendant was competent to stand trial and correctly denied a missing witness charge.
- People v Whitmore2026 NY Slip Op 05572
The court affirmed the judgment, determining that the defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was valid because it was knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently executed through both oral colloquy and written agreement. Consequently, the defendant’s challenge to the harshness of his sentence was precluded by the valid appeal waiver.
- People v Christopher P.2026 NY Slip Op 05571
The court vacated the sentence for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree because the lower court failed to make an on-the-record determination of the defendant’s eligibility for youthful offender status. The court affirmed the conviction for attempted robbery in the second degree, finding the plea voluntary and the sentence appropriate.
- Park-Lex Associates, Petitioner-Landlord-Cross-Appellant, v Fern M. Schad, Respondent-Tenant-Appellant, and Katherine Schad and Mark Mann, Respondents-Undertenants-Appellants.2026 NY Slip Op 51568[U]
Summary judgment of possession was unwarranted because triable issues of fact existed regarding the family member succession defense, specifically concerning the permanent vacatur date and residency requirements. The court held that the current Rent Stabilization Code provision defining permanent vacatur is remedial and must be liberally construed to apply to the pending proceeding.
- Estrada v Tower 31 LLC2026 NY Slip Op 51567[U]
The court affirmed the permission to discontinue the proceeding without prejudice but modified the final judgment to limit the award of attorneys’ fees to those incurred in connection with the motion to discontinue. The court found that ordering payment of fees from the inception of the proceeding was improvident because respondents caused much of the delay in the matter.
- Medical Imaging of Bronx, P.C., Inc. v MVAIC2026 NY Slip Op 26160
The court reversed the lower court’s judgment, directing dismissal of the complaint because the plaintiff failed to establish a reasonable justification for the delay in submitting no-fault claims to MVAIC. The Appellate Term held that the lower court lacked authority to disregard strict filing time frames based on public policy considerations.
- People v Kasner2026 NY Slip Op 26159
The Appellate Term affirmed the denial of the defendant’s speedy trial motion, finding that the People exercised due diligence in fulfilling their discovery obligations despite missing some items. The court held that the statute does not require a perfect prosecutor and that the missing materials were duplicative, reducing prejudice to the defense.
- Abramov v Capula Inv. US LP2026 NY Slip Op 26184
The court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that an in-house lawyer serving as a compliance officer is not categorically barred from asserting a statutory whistleblower retaliation claim under New York Labor Law § 740 due to attorney ethics rules. The court distinguished prior common law precedents by emphasizing the legislature’s clear policy favoring robust whistleblower protections and the plaintiff’s role in compliance rather than purely legal advice.
Also decided
- Matter of Wilhelm 2026 NY Slip Op 06377 October 29, 2026
- Matter of Tobin 2026 NY Slip Op 06375 October 29, 2026
- Matter of Palmer 2026 NY Slip Op 06373 October 29, 2026
- In the Matter of Meredith Bennett McCutcheon, an Attorney 2026 NY Slip Op 06372 October 29, 2026
- Ramos v Lendlease (US) Constr. LMB Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 06394 October 29, 2026
- People v Toms 2026 NY Slip Op 06388 October 29, 2026
- MTGLQ Investors, L.P. v Vazquez 2026 NY Slip Op 06386 October 29, 2026
- Matter of Ayngorn v New York City Dept. of Educ. 2026 NY Slip Op 06381 October 29, 2026
- People v Vasquez 2026 NY Slip Op 06334 October 28, 2026
- People v Taylor 2026 NY Slip Op 06333 October 28, 2026
- People v Sewell 2026 NY Slip Op 06332 October 28, 2026
- People v Jeff P. 2026 NY Slip Op 06327 October 28, 2026
- People v Moore 2026 NY Slip Op 06325 October 28, 2026
- People v Moore 2026 NY Slip Op 06324 October 28, 2026
- People v Moore 2026 NY Slip Op 06323 October 28, 2026
- People v Hill 2026 NY Slip Op 06320 October 28, 2026
- People v Haywood 2026 NY Slip Op 06319 October 28, 2026
- People v Deans 2026 NY Slip Op 06318 October 28, 2026
- People v Coffey 2026 NY Slip Op 06317 October 28, 2026
- People v Allen 2026 NY Slip Op 06314 October 28, 2026
- Newhouse v SSMG Realty, LLC 2026 NY Slip Op 06312 October 28, 2026
- Matter of Congregation Radin Dev., Inc. v Town of Ramapo 2026 NY Slip Op 06299 October 28, 2026
- Matter of Williams v New York State Bd. of Elections 2026 NY Slip Op 06271 October 28, 2026
- People v Minor 2026 NY Slip Op 06260 October 27, 2026
- People v Willis 2026 NY Slip Op 06264 October 27, 2026
- People v Adams 2026 NY Slip Op 06262 October 27, 2026
- People v Moore 2026 NY Slip Op 06258 October 27, 2026
- Pena v Dionisio 2026 NY Slip Op 06256 October 27, 2026
- Lafleur v Satori Laser 2026 NY Slip Op 06250 October 27, 2026
- Hyposwiss Private Bank Genève SA v JLRE4 LLC 2026 NY Slip Op 06247 October 27, 2026
- People v Williams 2026 NY Slip Op 06217 October 22, 2026
- People v Reyes 2026 NY Slip Op 06223 October 22, 2026
- People v Street 2026 NY Slip Op 06221 October 22, 2026
- People v Delacruz 2026 NY Slip Op 06219 October 22, 2026
- People v McGloster 2026 NY Slip Op 06218 October 22, 2026
- People v Wright 2026 NY Slip Op 06216 October 22, 2026
- People v F.G. 2026 NY Slip Op 06214 October 22, 2026
- People v E.E. 2026 NY Slip Op 06213 October 22, 2026
- People v Nasdaq 2026 NY Slip Op 06210 October 22, 2026
- Matter of Walter W. (Sabrina U.) 2026 NY Slip Op 06184 October 22, 2026
- People v Williams 2026 NY Slip Op 06208 October 22, 2026
- Matter of I.G.N. (E.N.) 2026 NY Slip Op 06205 October 22, 2026
- Gilbert v Powers 2026 NY Slip Op 06200 October 22, 2026
- Desai v Ninety Five Wall St. LLC 2026 NY Slip Op 06198 October 22, 2026
- Wilson v Incorporated Vil. of Val. Stream 2026 NY Slip Op 06165 October 21, 2026
- U.S. Bank, N.A. v Nektalov 2026 NY Slip Op 06163 October 21, 2026
- People v Lema-Curillo 2026 NY Slip Op 06151 October 21, 2026
- People v Worrell 2026 NY Slip Op 06150 October 21, 2026
- People v Mendoza 2026 NY Slip Op 06144 October 21, 2026
- People v Martinez 2026 NY Slip Op 06143 October 21, 2026
- People v Liriano 2026 NY Slip Op 06141 October 21, 2026
- People v Hulse 2026 NY Slip Op 06138 October 21, 2026
- People v Graydon 2026 NY Slip Op 06136 October 21, 2026
- People v Gilchrist 2026 NY Slip Op 06134 October 21, 2026
- People v Castillo 2026 NY Slip Op 06131 October 21, 2026
- People v Bruno 2026 NY Slip Op 06130 October 21, 2026
- Nationstar Mtge., LLC v Katz 2026 NY Slip Op 06126 October 21, 2026
- Matter of Red Hook Boat Club, Inc. v Town Bd. of Town of Red Hook 2026 NY Slip Op 06122 October 21, 2026
- Matter of M. (Wanda) 2026 NY Slip Op 06119 October 21, 2026
- Matter of Carlos Gonzalez, a suspended attorney, respondent 2026 NY Slip Op 06116 October 21, 2026
- Montera v Ravitz 2026 NY Slip Op 06111 October 21, 2026
- People v A.Z. 2026 NY Slip Op 06076 October 20, 2026
- People v Gibbs 2026 NY Slip Op 06075 October 20, 2026
- People v Washington 2026 NY Slip Op 06074 October 20, 2026
- People v Santos 2026 NY Slip Op 51712[U] October 15, 2026
- Matter of Perry v Monaco 2026 NY Slip Op 06031 October 15, 2026
- People v Burkett 2026 NY Slip Op 06030 October 15, 2026
- People v Mitchell 2026 NY Slip Op 06029 October 15, 2026
- People v Ruiz 2026 NY Slip Op 06028 October 15, 2026
- People v Gonzalez 2026 NY Slip Op 06023 October 15, 2026
- People v Sierra 2026 NY Slip Op 06020 October 15, 2026
- People v Herrera 2026 NY Slip Op 06018 October 15, 2026
- People v Swaby 2026 NY Slip Op 06017 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Makuch) 2026 NY Slip Op 06056 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (DeSouza) 2026 NY Slip Op 06055 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Wray 2026 NY Slip Op 06054 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Mannix 2026 NY Slip Op 06053 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Cera 2026 NY Slip Op 06052 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Lo Vacco v Pickholz 2026 NY Slip Op 06011 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Bohon 2026 NY Slip Op 06051 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Blomquist 2026 NY Slip Op 06050 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Schoep 2026 NY Slip Op 06049 October 15, 2026
- Matter of Coleman v Martuscello 2026 NY Slip Op 06048 October 15, 2026
- Karsch v Falcon Rappaport & Berkman PLLC 2026 NY Slip Op 06006 October 15, 2026
- Cullinan v New York Univ. 2026 NY Slip Op 05999 October 15, 2026
- People v Tippa 2026 NY Slip Op 05982 October 14, 2026
- People v Thomas 2026 NY Slip Op 05981 October 14, 2026
- People v Swaby 2026 NY Slip Op 05980 October 14, 2026
- People v Richards 2026 NY Slip Op 05979 October 14, 2026
- People v Ortiz 2026 NY Slip Op 05976 October 14, 2026
- People v Ly 2026 NY Slip Op 05973 October 14, 2026
- People v Forte 2026 NY Slip Op 05969 October 14, 2026
- People v Chen Liu 2026 NY Slip Op 05968 October 14, 2026
- People v Brown 2026 NY Slip Op 05967 October 14, 2026
- Beale v K Mart Corp. 2026 NY Slip Op 05926 October 14, 2026
- People v Burgess 2026 NY Slip Op 05920 October 13, 2026
- People v Bruce 2026 NY Slip Op 05919 October 13, 2026
- People v Hinds 2026 NY Slip Op 05917 October 13, 2026
- People v Saleem 2026 NY Slip Op 05916 October 13, 2026
- People v Jackson 2026 NY Slip Op 05915 October 13, 2026
- People v Marable 2026 NY Slip Op 05914 October 13, 2026
- Matter of 186 Norfolk LLC v New York State Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal 2026 NY Slip Op 05900 October 13, 2026
- Matter of Richard Alan Wittenburg, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05899 October 9, 2026
- Matter of Donald Angelo Salamone, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05898 October 9, 2026
- Matter of Krishnamurthy 2026 NY Slip Op 05897 October 9, 2026
- Matter of Johnson 2026 NY Slip Op 05896 October 9, 2026
- People v Reynolds 2026 NY Slip Op 05895 October 9, 2026
- Matter of Airabella P. (Michael P.) 2026 NY Slip Op 05877 October 9, 2026
- People v Thompson 2026 NY Slip Op 05874 October 9, 2026
- Matter of Watchman 2026 NY Slip Op 05846 October 8, 2026
- People v Trent D. 2026 NY Slip Op 05866 October 8, 2026
- Matter of Ryan 2026 NY Slip Op 05845 October 8, 2026
- People v T.B. 2026 NY Slip Op 05865 October 8, 2026
- Matter of Rodnite 2026 NY Slip Op 05844 October 8, 2026
- People v Nevarez 2026 NY Slip Op 05864 October 8, 2026
- People v Rivera 2026 NY Slip Op 05863 October 8, 2026
- Matter of Jones 2026 NY Slip Op 05842 October 8, 2026
- People v Sneed 2026 NY Slip Op 05862 October 8, 2026
- Matter of Grifoni-Waterman 2026 NY Slip Op 05841 October 8, 2026
- People v Jones 2026 NY Slip Op 05860 October 8, 2026
- Matter of Stevenson v Martuscello 2026 NY Slip Op 05837 October 8, 2026
- Matter of Greenland v James 2026 NY Slip Op 05836 October 8, 2026
- People ex rel. Marshall v King 2026 NY Slip Op 05835 October 8, 2026
- Hammer & Steele, Inc. v Environmental Mgt. Consultants, Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 05853 October 8, 2026
- People v Derusha 2026 NY Slip Op 05829 October 8, 2026
- Matter of B.B. v M.C. 2026 NY Slip Op 05847 October 8, 2026
- People v Slator 2026 NY Slip Op 05814 October 7, 2026
- People v Roca 2026 NY Slip Op 05813 October 7, 2026
- People v Perkins 2026 NY Slip Op 05812 October 7, 2026
- People v Jabbour 2026 NY Slip Op 05810 October 7, 2026
- Matter of Rivicci v New York City Fire Dept. 2026 NY Slip Op 05791 October 7, 2026
- Matter of DiPietro v Delacruz 2026 NY Slip Op 05787 October 7, 2026
- Guliyev v Banilov & Assoc., P.C. 2026 NY Slip Op 05773 October 7, 2026
- People v Singleton 2026 NY Slip Op 05748 October 6, 2026
- People v Benoit 2026 NY Slip Op 05747 October 6, 2026
- People v Solano 2026 NY Slip Op 05746 October 6, 2026
- People v Espiritusanto 2026 NY Slip Op 05744 October 6, 2026
- People v Benoit 2026 NY Slip Op 05742 October 6, 2026
- People v Aponte 2026 NY Slip Op 05740 October 6, 2026
- People v Francis 2026 NY Slip Op 05738 October 6, 2026
- People v Calisha 2026 NY Slip Op 05735 October 6, 2026
- H. Roske & Associates LLP v ESRT Empire State Building LLC 2026 NY Slip Op 05723 October 6, 2026
- Doren v Allstar Sec. & Consulting, Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 05720 October 6, 2026
- Matter of Leroy Johnston III, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05710 October 2, 2026
- People v Smith 2026 NY Slip Op 05709 October 2, 2026
- People v Sauberan 2026 NY Slip Op 05708 October 2, 2026
- People v Lewis 2026 NY Slip Op 05707 October 2, 2026
- People v Dunn 2026 NY Slip Op 05706 October 2, 2026
- People v Boitschenko 2026 NY Slip Op 05705 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Cheektowaga-Sloan Union Free Sch. Dist. v Ostempowski 2026 NY Slip Op 05704 October 2, 2026
- Thurston v Howard 2026 NY Slip Op 05703 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Syracuse Univ. v City of Syracuse 2026 NY Slip Op 05702 October 2, 2026
- McInnis v A.O. Smith Water Prods. 2026 NY Slip Op 05701 October 2, 2026
- Hedman Resources Ltd. v Occidental Chem. Corp. 2026 NY Slip Op 05700 October 2, 2026
- Mosey v Office of Ct. Admin. 2026 NY Slip Op 05699 October 2, 2026
- Burns v Sobieraj 2026 NY Slip Op 05698 October 2, 2026
- People v Serrano 2026 NY Slip Op 05697 October 2, 2026
- April I.O. v Taylor 2026 NY Slip Op 05696 October 2, 2026
- Brown v State of New York 2026 NY Slip Op 05695 October 2, 2026
- Doe v Moran 2026 NY Slip Op 05694 October 2, 2026
- Mock v New York Athletic Club of City of N.Y. 2026 NY Slip Op 05693 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Niagara Frontier Tr. Metro Sys., Inc. (Amalgamated Tr. Local Union 1342) 2026 NY Slip Op 05692 October 2, 2026
- People v Govan 2026 NY Slip Op 05691 October 2, 2026
- People v Brown 2026 NY Slip Op 05690 October 2, 2026
- People v Johnson 2026 NY Slip Op 05688 October 2, 2026
- People v Barber 2026 NY Slip Op 05687 October 2, 2026
- People v Couser 2026 NY Slip Op 05686 October 2, 2026
- People v Reed 2026 NY Slip Op 05685 October 2, 2026
- People v Ocasio 2026 NY Slip Op 05684 October 2, 2026
- People v Monroe 2026 NY Slip Op 05683 October 2, 2026
- Matter of John Firey Adkins, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05680 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Maureen P. Kieffer, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05679 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Crane 2026 NY Slip Op 05678 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Thomas William Mayo, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05677 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Kurz 2026 NY Slip Op 05676 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Bryan J. Keller, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05674 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Sznitken 2026 NY Slip Op 05673 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Sheila Sullivan Dickinson, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05672 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Carl R. Reynolds, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05671 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Thomas John Lynch, an Attorney, Resignor 2026 NY Slip Op 05670 October 2, 2026
- Matter of McQuillen 2026 NY Slip Op 05669 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Cunningham 2026 NY Slip Op 05668 October 2, 2026
- Tri Trekkers, LLC v Rigberg 2026 NY Slip Op 05666 October 2, 2026
- Bankers Healthcare Group, LLC v ALC Legacy, LLC 2026 NY Slip Op 05665 October 2, 2026
- People v Clegg 2026 NY Slip Op 05662 October 2, 2026
- Shelby D. v Sadowitz 2026 NY Slip Op 05661 October 2, 2026
- Baylies v Willis 2026 NY Slip Op 05660 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Carroll v Carroll 2026 NY Slip Op 05659 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Holmes v Stenshorn 2026 NY Slip Op 05658 October 2, 2026
- VanLaeken v Nakamura 2026 NY Slip Op 05656 October 2, 2026
- Lisa C. v Troser Mgt., Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 05655 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Dickinson v Whelan 2026 NY Slip Op 05654 October 2, 2026
- People v Banks 2026 NY Slip Op 05652 October 2, 2026
- 2055 Walden Ave., Inc. v 2115 Walden Ave, LLC 2026 NY Slip Op 05651 October 2, 2026
- Hoskins v Hoskins 2026 NY Slip Op 05648 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Santopietro v Shy Kym S. 2026 NY Slip Op 05647 October 2, 2026
- Bain v Urban League of Rochester N.Y., Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 05646 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Maddox B.S. (Kristopher S.) 2026 NY Slip Op 05645 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Kardar S. (Darmeshia S.) 2026 NY Slip Op 05644 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Juniper T. (Stephanie T.) 2026 NY Slip Op 05643 October 2, 2026
- People v Larson 2026 NY Slip Op 05641 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Loehr v Durand 2026 NY Slip Op 05637 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Staie v Davidson 2026 NY Slip Op 05634 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Roth v Roth 2026 NY Slip Op 05633 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Pine v Kirk 2026 NY Slip Op 05630 October 2, 2026
- People v Washington 2026 NY Slip Op 05629 October 2, 2026
- People v Griffin 2026 NY Slip Op 05626 October 2, 2026
- Ryan v Cunningham 2026 NY Slip Op 05622 October 2, 2026
- People v Hill 2026 NY Slip Op 05619 October 2, 2026
- People v Mease 2026 NY Slip Op 05617 October 2, 2026
- Matter of Ford v Vitucci 2026 NY Slip Op 05681 October 2, 2026
- In the Matter of Elizabeth Mary Opalka, an Attorney 2026 NY Slip Op 05590 October 1, 2026
- People v Doukoure 2026 NY Slip Op 05609 October 1, 2026
- Matter of Attorneys in Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a (Lee) 2026 NY Slip Op 05588 October 1, 2026
- People v Gonzalez 2026 NY Slip Op 05607 October 1, 2026
- In the Matter of Daniel Joseph Hartle, an Attorney 2026 NY Slip Op 05586 October 1, 2026
- People v Coleman 2026 NY Slip Op 05606 October 1, 2026
- People v Grundy 2026 NY Slip Op 05605 October 1, 2026
- Matter of Roman 2026 NY Slip Op 05584 October 1, 2026
- Matter of Marsalese 2026 NY Slip Op 05583 October 1, 2026
- People v Carrington 2026 NY Slip Op 05603 October 1, 2026
- Matter of Keitt v Uhler 2026 NY Slip Op 05576 October 1, 2026
- People v Shaun Q. 2026 NY Slip Op 05575 October 1, 2026