top of page
Commercial Litigation
Guaranty Provision Requiring Some Additional Performance Obligations Held Insufficient to Defeat Motion for Summary Judgment In Lieu of Complaint
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In past articles, we have examined a motion for summary judgment in lieu of a complaint under CPLR § 3213 ( see , e.g. , here , here , here , here , and here ). Today, we take another look at this statute by examining BBM3, LLC v. Vosotas , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 02279 (1st Dept. May 2, 2023) ( here ), a case involving an unconditional guaranty of payment. CPLR § 3213 Pursuant to CPLR § 3213, “ hen an action is based upon an instrument for the payment o
admin
May 3, 20237 min read


Second Department Cancels and Discharges of Record A Mortgage Pursuant to RPAPL 1501(4)
Mortgages on real property are typically delivered as security for the repayment of an obligation evidenced by a promissory note. A mortgage is an encumbrance on real property. Removing the encumbrance, if given the opportunity, makes sense.

Jonathan Freiberger
Apr 28, 20235 min read
Legal Opinion Letters Can Be Fraudulent
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Lucky of 195 Madison St. Roofing & Contracting Inc. v. Creif, 109 LLC , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 02065 (1st Dept. Apr. 20, 2023) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department was asked to consider whether a legal opinion issued in connection with a mortgage transaction was fraudulent. As discussed below, the First Department affirmed the holding of the motion court, which found that the legal opinion in question was, for pleading purposes, fraudulent. A
admin
Apr 24, 20236 min read
New Administrative Order Regarding the Scheduling of Foreclosure Sales in Suffolk County Becomes Effective on May 1, 2023
By Jonathan H. Freiberger In our October 19, 2020, Blog < here =">here</a>"> we discussed, inter alia , Administrative Order 98-20 , issued by Andrew A. Crecca, District Administrative Judge, Suffolk County. AO 98-20 established new procedures for scheduling foreclosure sales considering the COVID-19 pandemic. Briefly stated, AO 98-20 required the Court-appointed referee to schedule foreclosure sales through the Court Fiduciary Office so that only one sale would take place a
admin
Apr 21, 20232 min read
To be a Joint Venture? or Not to Be a Joint Venture – That is the Question
By: Jeffrey M. Haber When is a joint venture a joint venture under the law? The easy answer to this question can be found when the parties enter into an express joint-venture arrangement or an express partnership arrangement. The hard answer, however, must be found in the facts and circumstances of the dispute between the parties. In Capstone Capital Group, LLC v. DCK Worldwide Holdings, Inc. , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 01953 (1st Dept. Apr. 18, 2023) ( here ), the answer to the qu
admin
Apr 19, 20234 min read
Res Judicata Bars Action To Determine The Validity of a Refinancing Agreement
By: Jeffrey M. Haber Under the doctrine of res judicata, a final judgment on the merits of a claim precludes re-litigation of that claim by a party, and those in privity with that party. 1 This means that parties cannot relitigate the claim and all claims arising out of the same transaction, or series of transactions, even if based upon different theories or if seeking different remedies. It is a “transactional analysis” that the courts of New York apply to “preclude the lit
admin
Apr 17, 20235 min read
Supreme Court, Kings County, Denies Unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment Due to Evidentiary Failures
By Jonathan H. Freiberger As explained in prior Blog articles, a court will grant a motion for summary judgment if, upon all the papers and evidence submitted, the cause of action or defense is established sufficiently to warrant directing judgment in favor of the moving party as a matter of law. CPLR § 3212 (b); Gilbert Frank Corp. v. Federal Ins. Co. , 70 N.Y.2d 966, 967 (1988); Zuckerman v. City of New York , 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562 (1980). The function of the court when presen
admin
Apr 14, 20236 min read
Court Finds No Basis to Infer that Attorney Had Authority to Represent Party in An Action
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In today’s article, we address the question: When is an attorney authorized to act on behalf of a party? As one would expect, when the client says so, a lesson learned by the parties in Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP v. Koukis , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 01863 (1st Dept. Apr. 11, 2023) ( here ). The primary issue in Gibson Dunn was whether the default judgment entered against defendant George Koukis in July 2019 should be vacated, and the complaint dismissed as ag
admin
Apr 12, 20234 min read
The Doctrine of Unconscionability and Fraudulent Inducement
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Norman Realty & Constr. Corp. v. 151 E. 170th Lender LLC , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 01843 (1st Dept. April 6, 2023) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department addressed the affirmative defense of contract unconscionability, a topic that this Blog has not addressed in quite some time (here). 1 It also addressed plaintiff’s claims for breach of contract and fraudulent inducement. As discussed below, Norman Realty involved an action for unconscionabi
admin
Apr 10, 202312 min read
The Pitfalls of the Informal Appearances and the Benefit of the Corporate Veil
By Jonathan H. Freiberger This Blog has previously discussed informal appearances in an article aptly titled: “ Informal Appearances ,” from which the introductory information related to informal appearances is taken. Informal Appearances It makes sense that a “plaintiff appears in an action merely by bringing it.” Deutsche Bank Nat. Trust Co. v. Hall , 185 N.Y.S.3d 1006, 1007 (2 nd Dep’t 2020) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Once served with process, a de
admin
Apr 7, 20236 min read
Fraud and the Ice Cream Franchise
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In today’s article, we examine South Shore D’Lites LLC v. First Class Prods. Grp., LLC , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 01769 (1st Dept. Apr. 4, 2023) ( here ), a case involving the special facts doctrine in the context of a fraud claim, in particular, the justifiable reliance element of a fraud claim. South Shore D’Lites concerned licenses to sell ice cream. The licenses were sold to plaintiffs, South Shore D’Lites, LLC, D’Lites of West Caldwell, LLC, and HGB D’Li
admin
Apr 5, 20234 min read
RPAPL 1351(1) Requires a Foreclosure Sale to Occur Within Ninety Days of the Date of the Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale
By Jonathan H. Freiberger While this Blog has addressed numerous issues relating to residential mortgage foreclosure, it has never touched upon the requirement in RPAPL 1351 (1) that a judgment of foreclosure and sale “shall direct that the mortgaged premises, or so much thereof as may be sufficient to discharge the mortgage debt, the expenses of the sale and the costs of the action, and which may be sold separately without material injury to the parties interested, be sold b
admin
Mar 31, 20234 min read
Deletion of Electronic Data: Is it Trespass to Chattels or Conversion?
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In NW Media Holdings Corp. v. IBT Media Inc. , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 30875(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County Mar. 22, 2023) ( here ), Justice Melissa A. Crane addressed the question whether the destruction of millions of pages of data on a Google Workspace (“Workspace”) states a claim for trespass to chattels or conversion. As discussed below, Justice Crane concluded that the allegations concerning the destruction of such data sufficed to state a claim for conversio
admin
Mar 29, 20237 min read
Be Careful When Purchasing Interests in Structured Settlement Payments
By Jonathan H. Freiberger Structured settlement annuities are frequently used by courts and litigants to provide a stream of payments to, inter alia , injured parties and/or their families in personal injury and/or wrongful death cases. Due to abuse at the hands of unscrupulous factoring companies, the New York Legislature, in 2002, enacted the Structured Settlement Protection Act (”SSPA”). As the court in In the Matter of Petition of 321 Henderson Receivables Origination
admin
Mar 24, 20234 min read
WhatsApp With Your Spoliation of Important Cell Phone Information
By Jonathan H. Freiberger This Blog has frequently addressed the interplay between document discovery in litigation and the repercussions resulting from the spoliation of evidence. [ See, e.g., < here =">here</a>"> , < here =">here</a>"> , < here =">here</a>"> , < here =">here</a>"> and < here =">here</a>"> .] “Spoliation” refers to evidence that is “destroyed” “substantially altered” or “lost”. See, e.g., Gilliam v. Uni Holdings , 201 A.D.3d 83, 86 (1 st Dep’t 2021); D
admin
Mar 17, 20233 min read
Fraud Notes: First Department Talks About Misrepresentations of Fact and Justifiable Reliance
By: Jeffrey M. Haber To establish a cause of action for fraud, a plaintiff must plead a material misrepresentation of a fact, knowledge of its falsity, an intent to induce reliance, justifiable reliance and damages. 1 In Pope Investments II LLC v. Belmont Partners, LLC , Case No. 2022-02632 (1st Dept. Mar. 14, 2023) ( here ), and RCM/CMG Portfolio Holding, LLC v. Giordano , Case No. 2021-03254 (1st Dept. Mar. 14, 2020) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department addre
admin
Mar 15, 20238 min read
Under One Silo: Fraudulent Inducement, Fraudulent Conveyance and Violation of GBL § 349
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In Standlee Premium Prods, LLC v. WGST, Inc. , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 30625(U) (Sup. Ct., N.Y. County Mar. 2, 2023) ( here ), the court addressed three topics that we often write about: fraudulent inducement, fraudulent conveyance and GBL § 349. As to the former, the issue before the court was whether defendants made a material misstatement of present fact – i.e. , whether defendants misrepresented their present intention to perform under the agreements know
admin
Mar 10, 20238 min read
Champerty and Fraud . . . What a Combination!
By: Jeffrey M. Haber It is not often that we examine a case involving a cause of action for champerty. The last time we did so was on April 23, 2021 ( here ). We also examined the champerty doctrine in 2020 ( here ) and 2016 ( here ). But what is champerty? Simply, champerty is the prohibited practice of purchasing claims for the purpose of commencing litigation. New York’s prohibition against champertous transactions is codified in Section 489 of the Judiciary Law, which pr
admin
Mar 8, 202310 min read
Publicly Available Information Negates Fraudulent Concealment Claim
By: Jeffrey M. Haber In 228 W. 72 LLC v. 228A W. 72 LLC , 2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 01057 (1st Dept. Feb. 28, 2023) ( here ), the Appellate Division, First Department dismissed a fraudulent inducement claim because the facts allegedly concealed were publicly available. We examine 228 W. 72 LLC below. 228 W. 72 involved the purchase of real property (the “Premises”) by Plaintiff, 228 W. 72 LLC (“Plaintiff”), from Defendant, 228A W. 72 LLC (“Defendant”). Among other things, the con
admin
Mar 1, 20235 min read
The Importance of Attaching Invoices When Seeking Relief Based Upon Those Invoices
By: Jeffrey M. Haber The law reporters are brimming with cases in which a plaintiff seeks relief from a defendant for the failure to make a payment that is due and owing. The scenarios in which this fact pattern occurs are too many to recite here. As the reader might expect, plaintiffs do not always retain the invoice or other similar writing. Nevertheless, they seek relief, claiming that alternative evidence, such as an email, suffices to demonstrate that the defendant owes
admin
Feb 27, 20233 min read
bottom of page
