top of page
Commercial Litigation


When “Some, All, or None” Means Something Different: Ambiguity in Contractual Duties and Compensation
Contract interpretation principles require courts to give effect to the parties’ intent as expressed in the plain language of their agreement, while reading the contract as a whole and avoiding constructions that render provisions meaningless.

Jeffrey Haber
10 minutes ago7 min read


Breaking Ground or Breaking Promises: Dispute Over $1.075 Million Construction Claim
In today’s article, we examine Kingdom Assoc., Inc. v. WBC Servs. Inc., 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 03070 (1st Dept. May 14, 2026), a case arising from a proposed subcontract for excavation and foundation work on a New York City project.

Jeffrey Haber
2 days ago4 min read


The Filing of a Settlement Conference RJI Insufficient -- This Time -- to Avoid Dismissal Under CPLR 3215(c)
CPLR 3215(c) mandates dismissal of a complaint as abandoned if a plaintiff fails to take proceedings for a default judgment within one year of a defendant’s default, unless “sufficient cause” (a reasonable excuse and potentially meritorious claim) is shown. Recent cases clarify what qualifies as “taking proceedings.”

Jonathan Freiberger
5 days ago4 min read


Mechanics’ Liens and Discharge Bonds
Mechanics’ liens are powerful tools available to, inter alia, contractors, laborers and materialmen when they are not paid for their work in improving real property.

Jonathan Freiberger
May 85 min read


Disclosure as Defense: When Written Offering Materials Negate Claims of Fraudulent Misrepresentation
In Cortlandt St. Recovery Corp. v. TPG Capital Mgt., L.P., 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 02775 (1st Dept. May 5, 2026), the Appellate Division, First Department, examined the limits of fraud claims arising from complex private‑equity financing transactions.

Jeffrey Haber
May 66 min read


Conclusory Claims Fall Short: Second Department Dismisses Fraud and GBL § 349 Claims Against Insurance Adjuster
Conclusory allegations, even when bolstered by informal communications, such as text messages, will not substitute for well-pleaded facts showing materially misleading conduct or a specific misrepresentation.

Jeffrey Haber
May 35 min read


CPLR 322(a) Permits a Defendant to Demand Proof of Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Authority to Commence an Action Affecting Title to Real Property
CPLR 322(a) permits a defendant in an action affecting title to real property to demand proof that the plaintiff’s counsel was authorized to commence the action.

Jonathan Freiberger
May 14 min read


Foreign Banks, Foreign Disputes, and New York Courts: The Limits of Pre‑Judgment Attachment
Letters of credit are designed to reduce risk in international trade by reallocating who bears the risk of nonpayment, and when. Instead of relying solely on a buyer’s willingness or ability to pay, the seller relies on the issuing bank’s independent obligation.

Jeffrey Haber
Apr 2910 min read


Sometimes a Contract is Ambiguous, and Sometimes it is Not
Contracts are intended to bring certainty and clarity to commercial relationships, yet disputes often arise when written terms leave room for more than one reasonable interpretation. Under New York law, the question of ambiguity can determine whether a case is resolved on the face of the agreement or proceeds into litigation over extrinsic evidence and party intent.

Jeffrey Haber
Apr 278 min read


First Department Holds Mortgagor That Sold Property During Foreclosure Has Standing to Raise RPAPL 1304 Defense Because He May Be Liable For Deficiency
RPAPL 1304 requires that at least ninety days before commencing legal action against a borrower with respect to a “home loan” (as defined in the relevant statutes), a lender must: send written notice to the borrower by certified and regular mail that the loan is in default; provide a list of approved housing agencies that offer free or low-cost counseling; and, advise that legal action may be commenced after ninety days if no action is taken to resolve the matter.

Jonathan Freiberger
Apr 245 min read


When Fraud Isn’t Duplicative of Breach of Contract
Under New York law, fraud claims are not duplicative of breach of contract claims when they are based on misrepresentations of present fact collateral to the contract, even if they seek the same damages. Applying that rule, the Appellate Division, First Department held in Metropolitan Partners Group Admin., LLC v. Nerney, 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 02340 (1st Dept. Apr. 16, 2026), that plaintiff adequately pleaded both fraud and breach of contract claims ...

Jeffrey Haber
Apr 207 min read


The Equity of Redemption
In New York, the equity of redemption is a long standing common law right that allows those with certain interests in real property to redeem mortgaged property and prevent a foreclosure sale by tendering the full amount due at any time before the foreclosure sale.

Jonathan Freiberger
Apr 174 min read


Agreements to Agree Are Not Enforceable Contracts
In Kassirer v. Gotlib, 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 02154 (1st Dept. Apr. 9, 2026), the Appellate Division, First Department, reaffirmed a bedrock principle of New York contract law: agreements to agree are not enforceable.

Jeffrey Haber
Apr 136 min read


Sophisticated Parties, Precise Pleading, Fraud, and the Limits of NDAs in Transactions
Courts will dismiss breach of contract claims based on nondisclosure agreements where the plaintiff fails to identify specific confidential information allegedly misused. And fraud claims fail as a matter of law when a sophisticated party relies on oral assurances contradicted by written disclosures.

Jeffrey Haber
Apr 810 min read


For Whom the Interest Tolls
In prior BLOG articles, we discussed the court’s power to toll the accrual of interest in mortgage foreclosure actions.

Jonathan Freiberger
Apr 34 min read


The Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing
By: Jonathan H. Freiberger A basic tenet of contract interpretation is that “agreements are construed in accord with the parties’ intent.” Greenfield v. Philles Records, Inc. , 98 N.Y.2d 562, 569 (2002) (citations omitted); see also SM Owner, LLC v. Envoy Towers Co., L.P. , 245 A.D.3d 973 (2 nd Dept. 2026). It is equally fundamental that the “best evidence of what parties to a written agreement intend is what they say in their writing.” Greenfield , 98 N.Y.2d at 569 ( quotin

Jonathan Freiberger
Mar 274 min read


Summary Judgment Denied Where Termination “For Cause” Conflicted with Contract Text
In Kim v. XP Sec., LLC, the Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the denial of summary judgment in a wrongful termination action, reiterating settled principles of contract interpretation: clear, unambiguous agreements between sophisticated, counseled parties are enforced according to their plain meaning, without recourse to extrinsic evidence.

Jeffrey Haber
Mar 257 min read


Breach of a Demand Promissory Note Claim Accrues When Demand for Payment Is Made
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Minihane v. Brown , 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 01505 (2d Dept. Mar. 18, 2026), the Appellate Division, Second Department, addressed when the statute of limitations begins to run on a demand promissory note. The defendant borrowed $19,000 pursuant to a note that provided repayment was due only upon written demand, which could be made no earlier than January 1, 2015. Although the lender did not make a demand until September 2023, the borrower argued that the six

Jeffrey Haber
Mar 227 min read


The Appellate Division, First Department, Holds That FAPA’s Retroactive Application Does Not Invalidate Stipulation In Prior Foreclosure Action Tolling Statute of Limitations
By Jonathan H. Freiberger On March 17, 2026, the Appellate Division, First Department, decided HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Nicholas , a mortgage foreclosure action that addresses many of the issues raised in our prior BLOG articles. HSBC involves the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (“FAPA”), and the statute of limitations in foreclosure actions. By way of brief background, FAPA went into effect in December of 2022, and “represents the Legislature’s response to litigation strat

Jonathan Freiberger
Mar 214 min read


LLC Member Not Liable for LLC’s Debts and Usury
Under Limited Liability Company Law § 609(a), a member or manager of a limited liability company is not personally liable for the LLC’s debts, obligations, or liabilities solely by reason of being a member or acting in that capacity. Applying this rule, the courts in 27-21 27th St. Sponsors, LLC v. Kanta , 2026 N.Y. Slip Op. 01273 (1st Dept. Mar. 05, 2026), held that a minority member of an LLC could not be sued individually for the LLC’s obligations, as the operating agreem

Jeffrey Haber
Mar 89 min read
bottom of page
