The Second Department reversed Supreme Court and determined plaintiffs had proved ownership of a strip of land by adverse possession: …[W]e conclude that the plaintiffs demonstrated ownership to the subject strip through adverse possession. ” A party seeking to obtain title by adverse possession must prove by clear and convincing evidence . . . that […]
The Second Department affirmed Supreme Court’s determination that the planning board’s denial of approval of a final plat plan was arbitrary and capricious. The Court determined that the planning board was aware of the variance upon which the denial was based (involving the transfer of sanitary flow credits) at the time it approved the preliminary […]
The Second Department, after noting that an application for a variance can be made by an agent for the property owner, determined the Board of Zoning Appeals had properly granted the lot-width variances. In explaining the court’s role in reviewing variances, the court wrote: …”[L]ocal zoning boards are vested with broad discretion in considering applications […]
In affirming Supreme Court’s granting of plaintiff’s motion to substitute new affidavits of merit in a foreclosure proceeding because the accuracy of the execution and/or notarizations of the original affidavits could not be confirmed, the Second Department explained: CPLR 2001 permits a court, at any stage of an action, to disregard a party’s mistake, omission, […]
In reversing Supreme Court, the Second Department determined the plaintiff, in a replevin action, was not required to demonstrate irreparable harm in an action for seizure pursuant to CPLR 7102. The defendant had defaulted on an equipment lease. The court wrote: Pursuant to CPLR 7102(c) and (d), on a motion for an order of seizure, […]
The Second Department affirmed Supreme Court’s grant of a judgment as a matter of law to the defendant in a false arrest/malicious prosecution case based upon plaintiff’s counsel’s opening statement. In the opening, counsel stated the defendant had been arrested after the eyewitness victim made an in-person identification of the plaintiff to a police officer. […]
A mortgage foreclosure action was discontinued at the plaintiff’s request because the limited signing officer who signed the affidavit in support of plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment did not have personal knowledge of the facts. The defendant then cross-moved for summary judgment based on the plaintiff’s papers. In explaining that Supreme Court should not have […]
In reversing Supreme Court, the Second Department determined the Parole Board’s denial of parole was not arbitrary and capricious. After noting that the 2011 amendments to Executive Law 259-c(4) did not apply retroactively, the court wrote: …[T]he Supreme Court erred in concluding that the Parole Board’s determination was arbitrary and capricious … . Although the […]
The Second Department determined evidence seized from defendant’s home and statements made by the defendant should have been suppressed. Using the authority to visit parolees, the police accompanied the parole officer to defendant’s home as part of a burglary investigation. The defendant was arrested after stolen property was noticed by the police in the home. […]
In reversing a verdict after trial, the Second Department noted that the Labor Law imposes liability upon the agents of the property owner, as well as the owner and general contractor: In addition to owners and general contractors, Labor Law § 240(1) imposes liability upon agents of the property owner who have the ability to […]
Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy