assessed against a lienor when a lien is found to be “willfully exaggerated,” provides: Where in any action which the amount claimed to be due or to become due as stated in the notice of lien exceeded the amount actually may not be awarded unless the lien has been declared void for wilful exaggeration after a trial in an action Accordingly, if the mechanic’s lien is discharged prior to trial and, therefore, the “action is … merely other respects and was declared void by reason of willful exaggeration after a trial of the foreclosure action

It is not uncommon for parties settling an action to negotiate a confidentiality provision that prohibits whether to settle or continue the litigation, was not material and necessary to the defense of the action AMEC , 69 A.D.3d 99 (1st Dept. 2009), the defendant, AMEC, commenced a third-party action against its The court reasoned that “since the third-party action was one for indemnification and was necessarily was critical to whether AMEC/NYTB could continue to maintain the third-party action.” 69 A.D.3d at 106

As this Blog has noted, one of the more challenging elements of a fraudulent inducement cause of action

accelerated the remaining balance due under the note and, on November 1, 2017, plaintiff commenced an action statute of limitations ( see CPLR § 213(4)), and that plaintiff failed to commence its foreclosure action date each unpaid installment became due unless plaintiff accelerated the debt, and that plaintiff’s action The Court did so based on the distinction between an in personam action against the debtor’s assets did not bar the foreclosure action.

Later in 2012, the Gristede’s plaintiffs commenced the action against the Walgreen defendants and Scarsdale against the Walgreen defendants, the plaintiffs asserted a breach of contract claim (the “fifth cause of action The Walgreen defendants moved for summary judgment to dismiss the fifth cause of action. Consequently, “since an essential element of a breach of contract cause of action is the existence of

The Anti-Retaliation Provisions of The False Claims Act: The decision to blow the whistle is not an Recognizing the risks, Congress amended the False Claims Act (the “FCA” or the “Act”) in 1986 by adding under the Act. matters that reasonably could lead to a viable claim under the Act. to succeed in a retaliation claim for damages under the Act.

It has been some time since this Blog has written about the False Claims Act (“FCA”). District Court Proceedings The government filed an action under the FCA, seeking treble damages and In this regard, the Court found: First, the Government’s actions following its discovery of his fraud This structural shift in no way suggests that the actions of loan correspondents are not material; if anything, it demonstrates that their actions are of sufficient import that further supervision by an

The court reporter claims that it has an actionable claim for an account stated. A cause of action alleging an account stated cannot be used to collect under a disputed contract. account without objection within a reasonable time coupled with a partial payment gives rise to an actionable To state a cause of action for an account stated, a plaintiff must allege that: (1) the defendant is A cause of action for an account stated will fail where the defendant has rendered to the plaintiff its

The Federico action was commenced after the seller refused to return the down payment. 

for purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983; (d) the Securities and Exchange Act (the “Act”) does not create a private right of action for alleged violations of the rules enacted under the Act; and (e) the request them their due process and equal protection rights (Habliston alleged that FINRA “violated its duty to act footnote, the court concluded that the claim would fail because Habliston did not claim that FINRA acted In fact, Habliston alleged that FINRA acted “under federal laws” and in violation of “FINRA Rules.”

First Department set forth the elements of a specific performance claim: The elements of a cause of action      *     * Generally, the equitable remedy of specific performance is routinely awarded in contract actions Almost a year later, in May of 2016, plaintiff commenced an action for specific performance.  enforceable contract, it should be noted that there was a lengthy delay before plaintiff commenced its action it is established that the buyer has made excuses in order to delay closing on the contract, with an actual

As a result of the defaults, JPMorgan Chase commenced a foreclosure action by the filing of a summons a motion for summary judgment” (citations omitted), which is done by “demonstrating that, when the action including an endorsement in blank, was among the exhibits annexed to the complaint at the time the action the plaintiff satisfies the admissibility requirements of CPLR 4518(a) , and the records themselves actually