In a November 7, 2014 Commercial Division decision by Justice Demarest, the court vacated an arbitration award issued by the Rabbinical Court of Givas Hamorah (“Givas Hamorah”) and remitted the matter for rehearing. Continue Reading
In an August 15, 2014 Commercial Division decision by Justice Whelan, the court granted Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff commenced an action to foreclose a restated mortgage given by Defendant on a property in Bohemia, New York. Continue Reading
In an October 28, 2014 Commercial Division decision by Justice Friedman, the court granted in part, and denied in part, Morgan Stanley’s motion to dismiss a fraud action. The action was brought by plaintiff IKB International S.A. in Liquidation, alleging fraud on the part of Morgan Stanley in connection with the purchase of residential mortgage backed securities that were securitized and sold by the Morgan Stanley defendants. Continue Reading
In a November 25, 2014, Commercial Division decision by Justice Ritholtz, the court granted defendant-developer’s motion to compel arbitration of a dispute over a parcel of property owned by plaintiff in connection with a community development project in Astoria, Queens. Continue Reading
In a November 14, 2014, Commercial Division decision by Justice Ramos, deciding a motion brought by the Superintendent of Financial Services of the State of New York (“Superintendent”) seeking an order determining Sage Realty Corporation’s (“Sage”) priority of payment for its claim against Jugobanka A.D., Beograd (“Jugobanka”), the court held that Sage had the status of a judgment creditor of Jugobanka. Continue Reading
In a December 4, 2014, Commercial Division decision by Justice Whelan, the court granted the third-party defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint. The main action was commenced against the multiple defendants to foreclose the lien of a consolidated mortgage, which had been assigned to the plaintiff VFC Partners 19, LLC by third-party defendant, Hudson Valley Bank, NA (“Hudson Valley”). In the third-party action, the third-party plaintiffs asserted three causes of action against Hudson Valley for allegedly breaching obligations purportedly arising under the terms of the consolidated note indenture, which afforded the third-party plaintiff Romaz Properties Ltd. (“Romaz”) an option to renew the note for an additional five year term, which would extend the note’s maturity beyond the original maturity date. The third-party plaintiffs alleged that as a result of Hudson Valley’s purported breaches, it was responsible for Romaz’s default under the terms of the consolidated mortgage, which breach led to the main action. The court granted Hudson Valley’s motion, finding that the third-party plaintiffs failed “to allege, let alone establish, any of the elements necessary for the successful prosecution of a breach of contract claim.” The court further explained that the option provision of the note, upon which the third party complaint was based, imposed upon Romaz certain obligations for the successful exercise of the option, and that Romaz admitted to its failure to satisfy those obligations and, more fundamentally, to properly exercise the option.
In a November 20, 2014, Commercial Division decision by Justice Whelan, the court granted the plaintiff’s motion for preliminary injunctive relief. The plaintiff, Cold Spring Harbor Construction, Inc. (“CSHC, Inc.”) commenced the action seek to restrain and enjoin the defendant, Cold Spring Builders, Inc. (“CSB, Inc.”), a newly formed from using and employing the trade name “Cold Spring Builders” on the basis that its use of that name constituted trade name dilution and unfair a competition pursuant to, inter alia, GBL § 360-l, the “anti-dilution statute.” Continue Reading
In a December 8, 2014, Commercial Division decision by Justice Ramos, the court granted defendants’ motion for injunctive relief and sanctions against plaintiff corporation and its majority shareholder in an action alleging that defendants exploited plaintiff’s confidential and proprietary information in breach of their fiduciary duties and employment agreements. Continue Reading
In a December 5, 2014 Commercial Division decision by Justice Platkin, the court resolved the parties cross-motions to dismiss counterclaims and third-party complaints.
Plaintiff NYASHA Services, Inc Self-Insurance Trust (“Trust”) was a trust formed pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Law. Its members were employers in the home healthcare industry. In 1999, the Trust entered two agreements with Third-Party Defendants (“Cool”), who agreed to administer the self-insurance program in exchange for a percentage of annual premiums. Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff PeopleCare was a member of the trust. Continue Reading