Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The Board of Managers of Soho Greene Condominium v. Clear

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts Appellate Division, First Department


May 9, 2013

THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF SOHO GREENE CONDOMINIUM,
PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
CLEAR, BRIGHT & FAMOUS LLC, ET AL.,
DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION AND FINANCE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS. [AND A THIRD-PARTY ACTION]

Board of Mgrs. of Soho Greene Condominium v Clear, Bright & Famous LLC

Decided on May 9, 2013

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Freedman, Gische, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered November 19, 2012, as amended by order, same court and Justice, entered January 4, 2013, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its foreclosure cause of action and dismissed the counterclaim and third-party claim for violation of the condominium's bylaws and the counterclaim and third-party claim for breach of fiduciary duty, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The condominium unit owners validly ratified the board's renovation plans, based on knowledge they obtained through formal and informal communications (see e.g. Skytrack Condominium Bd. of Mgrs. v Windberk Partners, 167 AD2d 381 [2d Dept 1990]). We reject defendants' argument that the ratification vote was invalid because the unit owners were not disinterested; defendants were at least equally conflicted. Plaintiff showed sufficient cause for its second summary judgment motion (see Varsity Tr. v Bd. of Educ. of City of N.Y., 300 AD2d 38, 39 [1st Dept 2002]). The factual issue whether the unit owners' knowledge of the renovations was sufficient to support their ratification of the board's arguably voidable resolution was raised by defendants in a surreply long after the final submissions on the initial summary judgment motion.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MAY 9, 2013

CLERK

20130509

© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.