New York Law Watch
Week ending September 26, 2026
113 decision records: 82 meet the substance floor; 31 records are held from search listings.
Decision dates in this week run from September 22, 2026 to September 25, 2026, from 7 courts.
Selected decisions
The “transaction attacked” in veil-piercing can be the transfer that emptied the till
Matter of UBS Sec. LLC v Dondero
Holding The court held that the ‘transaction attacked’ in a veil-piercing claim can be a subsequent asset transfer designed to frustrate judgment recovery, not just the original underlying transaction. While the alter ego claim against Dondero survived for the corporate entities, it was dismissed regarding limited partnerships and against Ellington for lack of sufficient allegations of complete domination.
the 'transaction attacked' need not be the underlying transaction itself, but can be a subsequent transaction designed to frustrate a party's ability to recover
2026 NY Slip Op 05460, at the official text
The federal EFAA bars arbitration of a negligence claim with a logical nexus to a sexual assault
Holding The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) prevents the enforcement of predispute arbitration agreements in negligence actions that have a logical nexus to a sexual assault dispute, even if the defendant did not commit the assault. The court held that the EFAA applies broadly to claims that ‘relate to’ the underlying sexual assault, rendering the arbitration clause unenforceable.
We hold that it can, under the circumstances presented here.
2026 NY Slip Op 05405, at the official text
An extreme risk protection order does not require proof of a firearm threat or possession
Matter of New York State Police v Owen WW.
Holding The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of an extreme risk protection order, holding that CPLR article 63-A does not require proof that the respondent threatened harm with a firearm or currently possesses one. The court determined that the statutory standard focuses on the likelihood of serious harm to self or others, and imposing a firearm-specific prerequisite was an erroneous legal standard that foreclosed the petitioner from presenting its proof.
nothing in the statutory framework requires proof that the threatened or anticipated physical harm will be accomplished with a firearm
2026 NY Slip Op 05452, at the official text
By court
Court of Appeals
- The People v Dequan Greene2026 NY Slip Op 05440
The Appellate Division did not apply an incorrect legal standard in reviewing the weight of the evidence, and the Court of Appeals lacks further power to review that challenge. The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for review by the Court of Appeals.
Appellate Division, First Department
- Matter of UBS Sec. LLC v Dondero2026 NY Slip Op 05460
The court held that the ‘transaction attacked’ in a veil-piercing claim can be a subsequent asset transfer designed to frustrate judgment recovery, not just the original underlying transaction. While the alter ego claim against Dondero survived for the corporate entities, it was dismissed regarding limited partnerships and against Ellington for lack of sufficient allegations of complete domination.
- People v Sabater2026 NY Slip Op 05459
The court held that the Supreme Court’s decision in Erlinger v United States does not require a jury to determine tolling periods for prior convictions under New York’s persistent felony offender statutes. Such determinations are considered rote arithmetic calculations based on certified public records and fall within the Almendarez-Torres exception allowing judicial findings of prior convictions.
- People v Fulladosa2026 NY Slip Op 05458
The court reversed the conviction and dismissed the indictment because the search incident to arrest was unlawful. The officers deliberately declined to arrest the defendant for drug offenses, and the arrest for disorderly conduct was improper because the defendant’s identity was known, requiring an appearance ticket rather than an arrest.
- Gilbert v Powers2026 NY Slip Op 05457
The court modified the lower court’s order to deny plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment except to the extent premised on Bradford Winston’s bad faith litigation conduct, finding that broad collateral estoppel against other board members was unwarranted. Additionally, the court reversed the order quashing subpoenas, holding that the nonparties did not establish that the discovery sought was utterly irrelevant or futile.
- Bent v Cirone2026 NY Slip Op 05456
The court modified the lower court’s order to deny the dismissal of direct claims against individual board members, finding the allegations of collective participation in tortious acts sufficient at the pre-discovery stage. However, the court affirmed the dismissal of derivative claims because the plaintiff lacked the necessary membership interest in the condominium to assert such claims on behalf of unit owners.
- Veliu v Verizon N.Y. Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05374
The court reversed the grant of summary judgment on the plaintiff’s Labor Law § 240(1) claim, finding that triable issues of fact existed regarding how the injury occurred and whether the plaintiff was the sole proximate cause by failing to use available safety devices. The majority determined that the conflicting accounts of the accident and the plaintiff’s potential knowledge of available lumber braces precluded summary judgment.
- Martinez v 56th Realty LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05373
The Appellate Division reversed the grant of summary judgment on the owner’s cross-claim for contractual indemnification because there was an issue of fact regarding whether the owner’s agents were negligent. Under General Obligations Law § 5-322.1(1), indemnification agreements are unenforceable to the extent they cover liability contributed to by the negligence of the promisee’s agents.
- Juarez v Avacon Mgt. LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05372
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the third-party complaint, holding that the indemnification provision in the subcontract rider was unenforceable because the parties failed to reach a meeting of the minds regarding the scope of work. The court determined that the vagueness of the oral agreement’s scope of work prevented the rider from manifesting a clear and unmistakable intent to indemnify for the specific liabilities involved.
- I.M. v City of New York2026 NY Slip Op 05371
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment for the City and Empress Ambulance Service, finding that issues of fact remained regarding whether the EMTs owed a special duty and whether their actions were discretionary or ministerial under REMAC protocols. The court modified the lower court’s order to dismiss the cause of action for negligent hiring, training, and retention against the City due to the plaintiffs’ failure to oppose that specific branch of the motion.
- Berardi v 900 Third Ave., L.P.2026 NY Slip Op 05370
The court affirmed summary judgment on the plaintiff’s Labor Law § 241(6) claim, finding that the general contractor and owner were liable for a tripping hazard created by an inadequately secured tarp in a passageway. The court rejected defenses based on lack of notice, the integral-to-the-work doctrine, and the plaintiff’s alleged sole proximate cause.
- Aurelius Capital Master Ltd. v Hertz Intl. Ltd.2026 NY Slip Op 05369
The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment awarding plaintiffs the Alternative Financing Premium, holding that the phrase ‘commits to raise’ in the Backstop Agreement encompasses significant affirmative steps toward securing financing, not just binding agreements. The court further held that the impossibility exception did not apply because the Scheme Transaction remained legally feasible despite the failure to obtain a Bifurcation Order.
Appellate Division, Second Department
- Matter of Vaiselberg v Caller2026 NY Slip Op 05462
The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition to set aside the primary election results because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the alleged irregularities were sufficiently large to affect the outcome. The court found that the missing reconciliation forms did not render the determination of the rightful nominee impossible.
- Weber v Barnett2026 NY Slip Op 05439
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of a preliminary injunction because the defendants failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or a danger of irreparable injury. The court determined that money damages were an adequate remedy for the alleged losses regarding the distribution of real property sale proceeds.
- TAB Equity Group, LLC v Sharestates Invs. DACL, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05438
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the breach of contract claims against the Toorak defendants because the plaintiff failed to identify which specific provision of the loan documents was breached. The tortious interference claim was also properly dismissed because there was no evidence that the defendants procured a breach of the contract of sale.
- Superior Air Conditioning and Heating, Inc. v Russo2026 NY Slip Op 05437
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s judgment granting summary judgment in lieu of complaint to the plaintiff, as the plaintiff established a prima facie case for recovery on an absolute and unconditional guaranty. The defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact to defeat the motion.
- Stanley Supply & Tool, Inc. v Smallwood2026 NY Slip Op 05436
The Appellate Division held that the Supreme Court lacked jurisdiction to direct a nonparty to turn over monies pursuant to CPLR 5225, requiring the plaintiff to commence a special proceeding instead. Consequently, the court modified the order to deny the plaintiff’s cross-motion for turnover.
- SMG Automotive Holdings, LLC v Brooklyn Store, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05435
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to grant the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss several affirmative defenses that were without merit or abandoned, while affirming the denial of summary judgment on the first cause of action because the motion was premature. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the counterclaims because the plaintiff failed to meet its prima facie burden of eliminating triable issues of fact.
- Segura v Smith2026 NY Slip Op 05434
The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment on the comparative negligence defense because the police report created a triable issue of fact regarding the plaintiff’s sudden stop. However, the court modified the order to grant summary judgment dismissing the defenses of failure to wear a seatbelt and assumption of risk, as the plaintiff established he was wearing a seatbelt and the doctrine was inapplicable.
- Rojas v Riverhead Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05432
The court affirmed summary judgment for the plaintiff on the Labor Law § 240(1) claim because the unsecured ladder shifted, causing the fall. The court also affirmed the denial of summary judgment for the school district on the contractual indemnification claim because it was not a party to the relevant agreement.
- Prospect Auto Sales & Repairs, Inc. v State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.2026 NY Slip Op 05431
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment, determining that the complaint properly sought damages for breach of contract rather than a direct statutory violation. The court held that the defendant failed to meet its prima facie burden because its supporting affidavit was based on hearsay and it failed to provide the survey relied upon to justify its payment amount.
- Pierre v Sunrise Med. Labs.2026 NY Slip Op 05430
The Appellate Division modified the lower court’s order to restore the action to the trial calendar because the prior order only decided the summary judgment motion against one defendant and did not dismiss claims against others. However, the court affirmed the denial of the motion to resettle the order to correct a footnote, as it was unnecessary to correct a nondispositive recitation of facts.
- People v Melter2026 NY Slip Op 05429
The County Court properly designated the defendant a level two sex offender because his request for a downward departure was unpreserved for appellate review. Furthermore, the court found that a downward departure was not warranted as the mitigating factors were already accounted for in his risk score.
- People v Tucker2026 NY Slip Op 05425
The defendant’s waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the oral colloquy was ambiguous and the court failed to discuss the written waiver, allowing appellate review of the excessive sentence claim. However, the sentence was affirmed because it was not excessive.
- People v Rivera2026 NY Slip Op 05420
The court held that the defendant’s purported appeal waiver was invalid because the trial court failed to properly advise him of his rights and confirm his understanding of the waiver. Consequently, the appellate court reviewed the sentence and affirmed it as not excessive.
- People v Radhakrishnan2026 NY Slip Op 05417
The People failed to establish that they exercised due diligence in their discovery obligations, rendering the initial certificate of compliance invalid. Consequently, the speedy trial time had expired before the supplemental discovery was disclosed, justifying the dismissal of the indictment.
- People v Mills2026 NY Slip Op 05415
The court held that the purported waiver of the right to appeal was invalid because the record did not establish that the People, rather than the court, required it as a condition of the plea. Consequently, the court reviewed the excessive sentence claim and affirmed the sentence as not excessive.
- People v Lopez2026 NY Slip Op 05414
The appellate court affirmed the sentence, determining that the defendant’s valid waiver of the right to appeal precluded review of his contention that the sentence was excessive. The court found that the record demonstrated the waiver was made knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently.
- Nationstar Mortgage, LLC v Dimura2026 NY Slip Op 05406
The Supreme Court properly vacated a prior order entered upon the defendants’ default due to improper service of motion papers, which deprived the court of jurisdiction. Additionally, the court properly dismissed the complaint against the defendants because the plaintiff failed to strictly comply with RPAPL 1304 by mailing a single 90-day notice jointly addressed to both borrowers rather than separate notices to each.
- C.N. v Sigma Delta Tau Socy.2026 NY Slip Op 05405
The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act (EFAA) prevents the enforcement of predispute arbitration agreements in negligence actions that have a logical nexus to a sexual assault dispute, even if the defendant did not commit the assault. The court held that the EFAA applies broadly to claims that ‘relate to’ the underlying sexual assault, rendering the arbitration clause unenforceable.
- Murphy v Gallegos2026 NY Slip Op 05404
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint, holding that the defendants established prima facie that the police officer did not act with reckless disregard for the safety of others. The officer’s slow and cautious maneuvering, despite a momentary lapse in judgment, did not meet the high threshold for reckless disregard required for liability under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1104(e).
- Matter of Serpico-Maresca v Town of Hempstead2026 NY Slip Op 05403
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of leave to serve a late notice of claim because the petitioner failed to demonstrate that the Town acquired actual knowledge of the essential facts constituting the claim within the statutory period. Additionally, the petitioner failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for the delay in serving the correct municipal entity.
- Matter of Roe v D’Aguanno2026 NY Slip Op 05402
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s denial of the mother’s motion to vacate a default order granting the father residential custody. The court found that the mother failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for her failure to appear or a meritorious defense to the petition.
- Matter of Rizzotto v Romano2026 NY Slip Op 05401
The Supreme Court erred in denying the petition for judicial dissolution of a closely held corporation without conducting a hearing. Because the verified petition and supporting papers were prima facie sufficient to establish a basis for dissolution under Business Corporation Law § 1104-a, a hearing was required to resolve the conflicting claims regarding the relevant facts.
- Matter of Nostrand Drugs Rx, Inc. v Church Mut. Ins. Co.2026 NY Slip Op 05400
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s denial of the petition to vacate the master arbitrator’s award, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any statutory grounds for vacatur. The court emphasized that mere errors of law by the master arbitrator are insufficient to set aside the award.
- Matter of Nash v New York City Tr. Auth.2026 NY Slip Op 05399
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the petition, granting the request to deem the late notice of claim timely served nunc pro tunc. The court found that the petitioner demonstrated a reasonable excuse for the delay due to his severe injuries and that the respondents had actual knowledge of the claim without substantial prejudice.
- Matter of Landa v Rockland County2026 NY Slip Op 05398
The court reversed the lower court’s dismissal, holding that the County’s failure to respond to the administrative appeal within the statutory time limit constituted a constructive denial, thereby satisfying the exhaustion of administrative remedies. The matter was remitted for an in camera inspection to determine if the withheld records were properly exempt from disclosure under FOIL.
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. Zoning Bd. of Appeals2026 NY Slip Op 05397
The Appellate Division affirmed the money judgment awarding attorneys’ fees and imposing a monetary sanction on the petitioner for frivolous conduct. The court held that the lower court providently exercised its discretion in determining the amount of fees and sanctions, noting that the failure to submit a retainer agreement was not fatal to the fee application.
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. Zoning Bd. of Appeals2026 NY Slip Op 05396
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the petitioner’s proceedings, finding that the Zoning Board of Appeals rationally determined the petitioner lacked standing because she failed to demonstrate direct harm distinct from the public at large. The court also upheld the lower court’s imposition of sanctions for frivolous conduct.
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. Planning Bd.2026 NY Slip Op 05395
The Supreme Court properly dismissed the proceeding for lack of standing because the petitioner failed to demonstrate a direct, non-speculative injury distinct from the general public. The court also affirmed the award of sanctions and attorneys’ fees to the respondents for filing a frivolous proceeding.
- Matter of Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v Villanueva2026 NY Slip Op 05393
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate an order staying arbitration, finding that the appellant failed to proffer a reasonable excuse for her default in opposing the petition. The court determined that conclusory assertions regarding missing medical records and police reports did not constitute a reasonable excuse without an explanation of efforts to obtain those documents.
- Matter of Mansani D. (Sitan S.D.)2026 NY Slip Op 05392
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s finding that the mother neglected her child and derivatively neglected her other child, as she failed to rebut the presumption of parental responsibility regarding the child’s ingestion of alcohol and marijuana. The court further upheld the disposition releasing the children to the father’s custody, determining it was in the children’s best interests given the mother’s impaired judgment and the father’s consistent compliance with supervision.
- Matter of Jayden (Annette D.C.-Maria S.)2026 NY Slip Op 05390
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s grant of adoption petitions, finding that the mother abandoned the children by failing to contact or communicate with them for a period exceeding six months. Consequently, the mother’s consent to the adoption was not required under Domestic Relations Law § 111(2)(a).
- Man Ling Chan Lam v Qing Yun Xiao2026 NY Slip Op 05389
The Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of the complaint against the bank, title company, and title closer because the plaintiff failed to allege specific facts showing those defendants intentionally misrepresented material facts or that the plaintiff relied on such misrepresentations. The court also upheld the denial of leave to amend, finding the proposed negligence and aiding and abetting fraud claims were speculative and conclusory.
- LaMarco v LaMarco2026 NY Slip Op 05388
The Appellate Division affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate the judgment of divorce because the motion was untimely and the defendant failed to demonstrate a reasonable excuse for the delay. The court also affirmed the denial of the motion to stay enforcement of money judgments and the award of attorney’s fees to the plaintiff.
- JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v Gezlev2026 NY Slip Op 05387
The right to redeem a mortgage is extinguished as a matter of law upon the completion of a foreclosure sale, even if the redemption funds are wired shortly thereafter. Consequently, the foreclosure sale cannot be set aside based on the subsequent closing or the inadequacy of the bid price alone.
- Jagnow v Pekich2026 NY Slip Op 05386
The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendant declaring that the service of the notice to redeem was proper and that the tax deed was not null and void. The defendant made a prima facie showing that service complied with the Nassau County Administrative Code and due process, while the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.
- Inc. Vil. of Freeport v Freeport Union Free Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05385
The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment declaring that the Village holds fee title to the property and the School District holds only a revocable license or easement in gross. The School District failed to demonstrate that legislative approval was plainly conferred for an easement appurtenant, as parkland is impressed with a public trust requiring specific legislative authorization for alienation.
- Hoefler v Shoreham-Wading Riv. Cent. Sch. Dist.2026 NY Slip Op 05384
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, holding that the defendant school district established its prima facie entitlement to dismissal by demonstrating the air conditioning unit was an open and obvious condition that was not inherently dangerous. Consequently, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the property owner’s duty to warn or protect.
- Fezza v Legal Sea Foods, LLC2026 NY Slip Op 05382
The court affirmed the dismissal of cross-claims against the contractor, holding that the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact regarding the Espinal exceptions. The contractor’s expert evidence was deemed insufficient to establish that its repair work launched an instrument of harm or created the dangerous condition.
- Federal National Mortgage Association v Cassis2026 NY Slip Op 05381
The defendant waived the defense of lack of personal jurisdiction by filing a general notice of appearance and failing to raise the defense in a timely manner. Additionally, the defendant’s motion to vacate the note of issue was properly denied because it was untimely and failed to demonstrate unusual or unanticipated circumstances.
- DBW TL HOLDCO 2014, LLC v Kirk2026 NY Slip Op 05379
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of the plaintiff’s motion to discontinue the action against one defendant and to amend the judgment. The court held that the motion should be granted because the parties reached a settlement and no substantial prejudice or improper results would arise from the discontinuance.
- Civil Serv. Empls. Assn., Inc. v Town of Eastchester2026 NY Slip Op 05378
The court affirmed the dismissal of the complaint because the plaintiffs failed to file a required notice of claim under Town Law § 65(3). The court determined that the exception for ongoing violations did not apply and that the notice was a condition precedent to maintaining the action.
- Bank of America, N.A. v Discobath Products, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 05377
The Appellate Division affirmed the summary judgment in favor of the bank, finding that the plaintiff established its prima facie entitlement to judgment by submitting an analyst’s affidavit with business records demonstrating the defendants’ default. The court rejected the defendants’ argument that the motion was premature because discovery had not yet occurred, noting that mere speculation about future evidence is insufficient to defeat summary judgment.
Appellate Division, Third Department
- Matter of Putterman2026 NY Slip Op 05454
The court granted the attorney’s application to resign from the New York bar for nondisciplinary reasons and accepted her resignation. Consequently, her name was stricken from the roll of attorneys and she was ordered to desist from the practice of law in the state.
- Matter of Anonymous2026 NY Slip Op 05453
The court denied the applicant’s petition for admission to the bar, finding that his felony sexual offenses and subsequent conduct demonstrated substantial deficiencies in candor and judgment. The court concluded that the applicant failed to demonstrate the requisite character and general fitness to practice law.
- Matter of New York State Police v Owen WW.2026 NY Slip Op 05452
The Appellate Division reversed the lower court’s denial of an extreme risk protection order, holding that CPLR article 63-A does not require proof that the respondent threatened harm with a firearm or currently possesses one. The court determined that the statutory standard focuses on the likelihood of serious harm to self or others, and imposing a firearm-specific prerequisite was an erroneous legal standard that foreclosed the petitioner from presenting its proof.
- Matter of Carmela II. v Juan II.2026 NY Slip Op 05451
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s determination that visitation with the grandmother was in the children’s best interests, but reversed the specific visitation schedule due to the passage of time. The matter was remitted to Family Court to establish a new, potentially graduated or supervised, visitation schedule to facilitate bonding.
- Matter of Coleman v Martuscello2026 NY Slip Op 05450
The court affirmed the dismissal of the petition, holding that the regulatory time limits for prison disciplinary hearings are directory rather than mandatory. Consequently, the petitioner failed to demonstrate the substantial prejudice required to annul the disciplinary determination based on the delay in the hearing.
- Matter of Sheehan v Schroeder2026 NY Slip Op 05449
The Appellate Division confirmed the DMV’s revocation of the petitioner’s driver’s license, finding that the administrative determination was supported by substantial evidence despite the dismissal of the underlying criminal charges. The court held that the administrative license revocation process is independent of the criminal proceeding and that the ALJ’s denial of cross-examination and adjournment requests did not violate due process.
- Matter of Goldstein v Town of Niskayuna2026 NY Slip Op 05448
The court annulled the termination determination because the hearing officer failed to make sufficiently specific factual findings to permit meaningful review. The officer did not explain the basis for sustaining each specification of misconduct or resolve sharp factual disputes regarding the petitioner’s culpability.
- Castracane v Kasmier2026 NY Slip Op 05447
The court held that a release by an injured party does not preclude common-law indemnification claims against a settling tortfeasor, but such claims are unavailable where the non-settling parties are alleged to have committed their own independent acts of negligence. Because the defendants’ liability was based on their direct negligence rather than vicarious liability for the settler’s conduct, the cross-claims for common-law indemnification were properly dismissed.
- Matter of Devon YY. v James ZZ.2026 NY Slip Op 05446
The Appellate Division affirmed the Family Court’s order granting the father primary physical custody and final decision-making authority, finding that the mother’s repeated failures to return the child and unilateral changes to the child’s education and healthcare constituted a change in circumstances. The court determined that the best interests of the child were served by supervised visitation for the mother and that the mother failed to establish a family offense.
- Matter of Barletta v Martuscello2026 NY Slip Op 05445
The court held that while the request for the 2021 misbehavior report was moot, the petitioner substantially prevailed in the proceeding and is entitled to have the matter remitted for a determination of statutory litigation costs. The lower court’s dismissal of the fee request was reversed because the agency failed to respond within the statutory time and the petitioner obtained the requested documents.
- People v Thayer2026 NY Slip Op 05444
The court affirmed the vacatur of the conviction, finding that local counsel’s failure to disclose a private conversation with the judge’s law clerk created an actual conflict of interest that deprived the defendant of effective assistance of counsel. Consequently, the defendant’s waiver of the right to a jury trial was deemed invalid because it was not made with full knowledge of the information possessed by local counsel.
- People v Wilson2026 NY Slip Op 05443
The appellate court held that the lower court erred in denying the defendant’s speedy trial motion as untimely and remanded the case for a determination on whether the People’s certificate of compliance was proper. The court found the record inadequate to assess whether the prosecution exercised due diligence in disclosing oral statements made by the defendant at the sobriety checkpoint.
- People v Edmunds2026 NY Slip Op 05442
The court reversed the judgment and ordered a new trial because the trial court erred in denying a for-cause challenge to a prospective juror who made equivocal statements regarding her impartiality. The court found the evidence legally sufficient to support the conviction for menacing a police officer and upheld the validity of the waiver of indictment.
- People v Kent2026 NY Slip Op 05441
The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court’s use of juror initials and numbers during voir dire was an unpreserved error that did not warrant the exercise of interest of justice jurisdiction. The court further rejected the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, finding that trial counsel’s failure to object to the procedure may have been a legitimate strategic decision to avoid alerting jurors to the deviation.
Appellate Term, First Department
- 85 East End Owner, LLC v Samantha Ferraro2026 NY Slip Op 51534[U]
The court affirmed the denial of the tenant’s motion to vacate the default judgment but modified the order to include a 30-day cure period. The court held that RPAPL § 753 (4) applies to holdover proceedings based on a failure to sign a renewal lease and must be construed liberally to extend its beneficial effects.
- Oparaji v Turkish Airlines, Inc.2026 NY Slip Op 51533[U]
The appeal was dismissed without costs because the plaintiff failed to perfect the appeal by submitting a sufficient appendix. The court found the appendix patently insufficient as it omitted the papers underlying the motion, including the defendant’s opposition and a prior order.
- Springer v Aminov Jewelers2026 NY Slip Op 51532[U]
The Appellate Term affirmed the Small Claims judgment awarding the plaintiff $8,000, finding that the evidence supported the conclusion that the defendant sold the plaintiff a stolen Rolex watch. The court applied the standard that substantial justice was done, as the seized watch was rationally determined to be the same one sold by the defendant.
- Lopez v Metro By T-Mobile2026 NY Slip Op 51531[U]
The Appellate Term affirmed the Small Claims judgment because the inquest court applied appropriate substantive law and accomplished substantial justice. The court found no record support for further recovery since the plaintiff was already awarded the full amount of damages sought.
- RVA Leasing Corp. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.2026 NY Slip Op 51527[U]
The court reversed the lower court’s denial of summary judgment, granting the insurer’s motion to dismiss the complaint for first-party no-fault benefits. The insurer established that it timely mailed examination under oath notices and provided specific objective justification for the examinations, while the plaintiff failed to raise any issue of fact regarding their failure to appear.
- Port Authority of New York and New Jersey v Hollister Fleming2026 NY Slip Op 51525[U]
The appeal was dismissed because the plaintiff was not aggrieved by the order granting a new trial, which vacated the prior dismissal. Additionally, the appeal from the original judgment was dismissed as academic because it had been superseded by the subsequent order.
- People v Rodriguez2026 NY Slip Op 51524[U]
The court affirmed the conviction because the defendant’s claim regarding the repleader agreement was unpreserved and declined to review it in the interests of justice. Alternatively, the court rejected the claim on the merits because the defendant failed to comply with the conditions of the agreement despite multiple opportunities.
- People v Brown2026 NY Slip Op 51522[U]
The court affirmed the conviction for forcible touching, finding the evidence legally sufficient and not against the weight of the evidence. The jury was justified in inferring the defendant’s intent to degrade or abuse the victim based on his non-consensual physical contact.
Appellate Term, Second Department
- People v Strickland2026 NY Slip Op 51599[U]
The Appellate Term reversed the lower court’s order striking the certificate of compliance and dismissing the accusatory instrument because the lower court failed to determine whether the defendant satisfied the statutory requirement to challenge the certificate as soon as practicable. The matter was remitted for a hearing to resolve this threshold issue regarding the timeliness of the defendant’s motion.
- People v Grieci2026 NY Slip Op 51598[U]
The Appellate Term reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the accusatory instrument on speedy trial grounds, holding that the People’s prearraignment statement of readiness was valid. The court determined that the complaint was converted to an information when supporting depositions were filed, allowing the People to announce readiness before the defendant’s arraignment.
- People v Hernandez-Zuniga2026 NY Slip Op 51597[U]
The court affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to vacate his guilty plea, finding that he failed to establish prejudice because the court explicitly advised him of potential negative immigration consequences during the plea proceeding. Consequently, the defendant’s claim that his attorney’s failure to provide specific immigration advice rendered his plea involuntary was insufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing.
- People v Scardino2026 NY Slip Op 51596[U]
The certificate of compliance was invalid because the prosecution failed to exercise due diligence in disclosing the detective’s notes before filing it. Consequently, the statement of readiness was illusory, and the People were chargeable with more than 90 days of delay, requiring dismissal of the accusatory instrument.
- People v Zarate2026 NY Slip Op 51595[U]
The court affirmed the conviction, determining that the People did not violate the defendant’s speedy trial rights because the total chargeable time did not exceed the 90-day statutory limit. Additionally, the court held that the jury’s split verdict was not repugnant because the two charges contained different elements, allowing for a legally permissible acquittal on one count and conviction on the other.
Trial courts
- Corporate Woods 15, LLC v West Bradford Corp.2026 NY Slip Op 51642[U]
The court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction in aid of arbitration because the petitioners failed to demonstrate a fair probability of success on the merits, specifically regarding the interpretation of the operating agreements and fiduciary duties. The court ordered the defendant to arbitrate the claims and stayed the declaratory judgment action during the pendency of the arbitration.
Also decided
- People ex rel. Harnick v Spano 2026 NY Slip Op 05461 September 25, 2026
- In the Matter of Diana Merrill Woodman, an Attorney 2026 NY Slip Op 05455 September 24, 2026
- Burns-Tetteh v Goldfarb Props.-Pelican Mgt., Inc. 2026 NY Slip Op 51530[U] September 24, 2026
- Snyder v Sivic Realty Corp. 2026 NY Slip Op 51529[U] September 24, 2026
- Saintvilus v Hall 2026 NY Slip Op 05433 September 23, 2026
- People v De La Cruz 2026 NY Slip Op 05428 September 23, 2026
- People v Ward 2026 NY Slip Op 05427 September 23, 2026
- People v Walker 2026 NY Slip Op 05426 September 23, 2026
- People v Thompson 2026 NY Slip Op 05424 September 23, 2026
- People v Stedman 2026 NY Slip Op 05423 September 23, 2026
- People v Smith 2026 NY Slip Op 05422 September 23, 2026
- People v Ruiz 2026 NY Slip Op 05421 September 23, 2026
- People v Rivera 2026 NY Slip Op 05419 September 23, 2026
- People v Ricks 2026 NY Slip Op 05418 September 23, 2026
- People v Nelson 2026 NY Slip Op 05416 September 23, 2026
- People v Locus 2026 NY Slip Op 05413 September 23, 2026
- People v Kennedy 2026 NY Slip Op 05412 September 23, 2026
- People v Jacobs 2026 NY Slip Op 05411 September 23, 2026
- People v Heath 2026 NY Slip Op 05410 September 23, 2026
- People v Cuebas 2026 NY Slip Op 05409 September 23, 2026
- People v Campbell 2026 NY Slip Op 05408 September 23, 2026
- NewRez, LLC v Shannon 2026 NY Slip Op 05407 September 23, 2026
- Matter of Kopald v Town of Highlands N.Y. 2026 NY Slip Op 05394 September 23, 2026
- Matter of Chambers v Straw 2026 NY Slip Op 05391 September 23, 2026
- Guthrie v New York-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital 2026 NY Slip Op 05383 September 23, 2026
- DBW TL HOLDCO 2014, LLC v Kirk 2026 NY Slip Op 05380 September 23, 2026
- 1539 Realty, LLC v Murphy 2026 NY Slip Op 05376 September 23, 2026
- RVA Leasing Corp. v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. 2026 NY Slip Op 51528[U] September 22, 2026
- Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. v Lois 2026 NY Slip Op 51526[U] September 22, 2026
- People v McCummings 2026 NY Slip Op 51523[U] September 22, 2026
- People ex rel. Scaggs v Spano 2026 NY Slip Op 05375 September 22, 2026
Published September 26, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026.