It is not uncommon for a nonparty to a litigation to ask their attorney whether they must comply with a subpoena duly served upon them. As the court in Manswell v. Baptiste , 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 29360 (Civ. Ct., Kings County, Nov. 20, 2019) ( here ), made clear, non-compliance is not an option. A subpoena is a document that commands a person to testify at a trial or deposition and/or to produce documents specifically demanded. A subpoena duces tecum differs from a subpoena ad

Statutes of limitations, which are a critical part of litigation, are designed to prevent litigants from sitting on their rights. A brief primer on New York’s Statute of Limitations, is contained within this Blog’s post, “ Second Department Finds No Issue of Fact as to Whether Defendant Should be Estopped From Asserting a Statute of Limitations Defense. ” Article 2 of New York’s CPLR addresses Statute of Limitations issues. The CPLR contains several provisions that toll or

Allegations of fraudulent inducement come in many contexts. Today, this Blog looks at a fraudulent inducement claim in the context of a merger. Kainz v. Bernstein , No. 19 Civ. 2499 (LLS) (S.D. N.Y. Nov. 13, 2019) ( here ). As this Blog has noted, one of the more challenging elements of a fraudulent inducement cause of action for a plaintiff to satisfy is the justifiable reliance element. To satisfy this element, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he/she exercised the means of

Economic duress, like duress, generally, provides an injured party with grounds to void a contract. Proof of the existence of economic duress requires a showing that one party to a contract has threatened to breach the agreement by withholding performance unless the other party agrees to some further demand. A party cannot be guilty of economic duress, however, for refusing to do that which it is not legally required to do or for threatening to do that which it is legally aut

Referees are frequently appointed by New York courts. The fees to which an appointed referee is entitled are generally governed by Rule 8003 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules (“CPLR”). CPLR 8003(a) presently provides that: A referee is entitled, for each day spent in the business of the reference, to three hundred fifty dollars unless a different compensation is fixed by the court or by the consent in writing of all parties not in default for failure to appear or

Referees are frequently appointed by New York courts. The fees to which an appointed referee is entitled are generally governed by Rule 8003 of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules.

On November 15, 2019, the Appellate Division, Fourth Department, issued a decision involving the impact, if any, of a bankruptcy discharge on a subsequent foreclosure proceeding – an issue, the Court observed, it had not previously addressed. In Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB v. Fernandez , 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 08290 (4th Dept. Nov. 15, 2019) ( here ), the Court held that, absent terms in the mortgage to the contrary, a discharge in bankruptcy does not automatically accelerate

Last week, two Appellate Division courts affirmed the dismissal of fraud claims because the parties asserting the claims failed to demonstrate justifiable reliance, and assert their claim within the statute of limitations. Atlas MF Mezzanine Borrower, LLC v. Macquarie Tex. Loan Holder LLC , 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 08009 (1st Dept. Nov. 7, 2019) ( here ), and Beacon Estates, LLC v. Ingrassia , 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 08042 (4 th Dept. Nov. 8, 2019) ( here ). In today’s post, this Blog l

This Blog, in “ Contract Must be Enforced According to Its Clear and Concise Terms Says Second Department ,” analyzed Gristede’s Operating Corp. v. Scarsdale Shopping Ctr. Assoc., LLC, 2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 07771 (2 nd Dep’t October 30, 2019), in which the Second Department found that, inter alia , clear and unambiguous contracts will be interpreted according their terms. The same analysis applies with respect to notice/termination provisions of construction contracts. Thus,

Under New York’s rules of contract interpretation, “when parties set down their agreement in a clear, complete document, their writing should be enforced according to its terms.” Riverside S. Planning Corp. v. CRP/Extell Riverside, L.P. , 13 N.Y.3d 398, 403 (2009); W.W.W. Assoc. v. Giancontieri , 77 N.Y.2d 157, 162 (1990). “This rule is applied with special force ‘… where commercial certainty is a paramount concern, and where the instrument was negotiated between sophisticate

There has been a lot of litigation regarding an out of possession landlord’s tort liability to third parties. Generally, an out of possession landlord “is not liable for injuries resulting from the condition of the demised premises….” Henry v. Hamilton Equities, Inc. (Ct Appeals October 24, 2019). An exception exists where “the landlord covenants in the lease or otherwise to keep the land in repair.” Henry (citing , Putnam v. Stout , 38 N.Y.2d 607 (1976)) (internal quot

It is well settled that parties are free to contractually shorten a limitations period as long as their intent to do so is clearly stated and the time period is reasonable. Whitney Lane Holdings, LLC v. Don Realty, LLC , 159 A.D.3d 1163, 1165 (3d Dept. Mar. 8, 2018); John J. Kassner & Co. v. City of New York , 46 N.Y.2d 544, 550-551 (1979); see also CPLR 201, 213. But what is reasonable? As one might think, the answer to the question depends upon the facts and circumstances

To assert a fraud claim, a plaintiff must allege “a misrepresentation or a material omission of fact which was false and known to be false by defendant, made for the purpose of inducing the other party to rely upon it, justifiable reliance of the other party on the misrepresentation or material omission, and injury.” Mandarin Trading Ltd. v. Wildenstein , 16 N.Y.3d 173, 178 (2011) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted); Lama Holding Co. v Smith Barney , 88 N.Y.2d 413

Under the present “commencement by filing” system, an action (or proceeding) (collectively, an “Action”) is commenced by filing ( CPLR 304 (a))the initiatory paper(s) with the “clerk of the court in the county in which the ction … is brought or any other person designated by the clerk of the court for that purpose (CPLR 304(c)). Once an Action is commenced, the plaintiff (or petitioner) (collectively, a “Plaintiff”) must effectuate service of process pursuant to the paramete

Stenographic services are an important part of any litigation. After all, deposition and trial testimony must be recorded, as they are part of the record. Typically, the attorney noticing the testimony retains the court reporter and commits to be directly responsible for the costs of the services. In some states, such as New York, the attorney is legally responsible (by rule, regulation or statute) for the stenographer’s fees, unless specifically disclaimed in writing. Ther

Purchasing real estate, a new home for example, is an expensive proposition. It is rare that a new home buyer has enough cash on hand to make the purchase. Therefore, it is typical for such a purchaser to seek mortgage financing to fund the purchase. For this very reason, a real estate buyer would be reluctant to enter into a contract for the purchase of real estate without the ability to cancel the contract if a lender declines the purchaser’s application for purchase mon

Readers of this Blog know that, as a general matter, New York courts will not permit a tort claim to survive a motion to dismiss when the claim arises from a breach of contract. here).=">here</a>)."> Indeed, courts routinely dismiss a tort claim where “ he existence of a valid and enforceable written contract govern a particular subject matter” and the recovery sought arises out of the same facts and circumstances. Clark-Fitzpatrick v. Long Is. , 70 N.Y.2d 382 (1987). Howeve

In today’s commercial world, businesses claiming breach of an agreement often seek lost profits resulting from the breach. The hurdle that the plaintiff must overcome when seeking such relief, however, can be high. As discussed below, the reason has to do with the type of damages sought and the applicable standard of proof. There are two types of damages recoverable as lost profits: (1) lost profits that are general damages; and (2) lost profits that are consequential or spe

In Pari Delicto, the Adverse Interest Exception and the Alleged Failure to Uncover Fraudulent Activity The doctrine of in pari delicto has been a part of the common law for at least two centuries. Kirschner v. KPMG LLP , 15 N.Y.3d 446 (2010), citing Woodworth v. Janes , 2 Johns Cas 417, 423 (N.Y. 1800) (parties in equal fault have no rights in equity); Sebring v. Rathbun , 1 Johns Cas 331, 332 (N.Y. 1800) (where both parties are equally culpable, courts will not “interpose

Specific Performance is an equitable remedy used to compel a party to perform under a contract. McGinnis v. Cowhey , 24 A.D.3d 629 (2 nd Dep’t 2005). Specific Performance is frequently used to enforce a party’s rights under real estate contracts. In EMF General Contracting Corp. v. Bisbee , 6 A.D.3d 45 (2004), the First Department set forth the elements of a specific performance claim: The elements of a cause of action for specific performance of a contract are that the p