New York Law Watch
Week ending October 10, 2026
196 decision records: 155 meet the substance floor; 41 records are held from search listings.
Decision dates in this week run from October 5, 2026 to October 9, 2026, from 6 courts.
Selected decisions
The City’s greenwashing claims against oil companies fail: comparative product statements were not deceptive
City of New York v Exxon Mobil Corp.
Holding 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.
The City cannot have it both ways by, on one hand, asserting that consumers are aware of and commercially sensitive to the fact that fossil fuels cause climate change
2026 NY Slip Op 05851, at the official text
By court
Appellate Division, First Department
- 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 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.
Appellate Division, Second Department
- 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.
Appellate Division, Third Department
- 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.
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
- 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.
Appellate Term, First Department
- 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.
- 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.
Supreme Court, New York County
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
Also decided
- 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
Published October 10, 2026. Updated November 14, 2026.