September 26, 2013
Richard S. Weisman, Plaintiff-Respondent,
Jerzy Maksymowicz, Defendant-Appellant.
Jerzy Maksymowicz, appellant pro se.
Weisman & Calderon LLP, Mount Vernon (Richard S. Weisman of counsel), for respondent.
Sweeny, J.P., DeGrasse, Manzanet-Daniels, Clark, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Howard H. Sherman, J.), entered April 6, 2012, which, among other things, granted plaintiff's motion for an order cancelling a mechanic's lien filed by defendant, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly found that defendant's purported itemized submissions in support of the lien were inadequate (see Lien Law § 38). Items such as showering and having a barbecue with neighbors in the name of "community relations" do not constitute an "improvement" to the property within the meaning of the Lien Law (see id. at § 2), nor were they related to any improvement. Similarly, the ordinary yard work that defendant may have performed does not constitute an improvement (see Chase Lincoln First Bank v New York State Elec. & Gas Corp., 182 A.D.2d 906, 907 [3d Dept 1992]). Defendant also failed to submit evidence of an agreement by plaintiff (the guardian of the incapacitated owner) or the owner for any of defendant's alleged services (see Lien Law § 3).