Stabat Mater Dolorosa.

"Quid est veritas?"

Contract law.

A party in breach of its own contractual obligations is not entitled to specific performance on the agreement. 

Jawara v. Araka, NY Slip Op 02130 (1ast Dep't April 10, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Summary judgment.

Since a motion for summary judgment must be addressed to specific causes of action or defenses, the court may search the record and award summary judgment for a nonmoving party only as to a cause of action or issue that is the subject of the motion before the court, pursuant to CPLR 3212(b). Apart from considerations of simple fairness, allowing a summary judgment motion by any party to bring up for review every claim and defense asserted by every other party would be tantamount to shifting the well-accepted burden of proof on summary judgment motions.

Gordillo-Jiminez v. Ravagh Persian Grill, Inc., NY Slip Op 02059 (2d Dep't April 9, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Attorneys' fees.

Discharge for cause is necessary to warrant the forfeiture of an attorney's fee. 

Thuku v. 324 E. 93, LLC, NY Slip Op 02138 (1st Dep't April 10, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Arbitration agreements.

The enforceability of arbitration agreements is governed by the rules applicable to contracts. Although the plaintiff did not sign the agreement in her individual capacity, she is bound by the arbitration clause under the direct benefits theory of estoppel, as the allegations in the complaint show that she knowingly exploited the benefits of the agreement and received benefits flowing directly from that agreement. The defendants did not waive the defense that the parties' dispute was subject to arbitration. The defendants' conduct in appearing in and defending this state court action was not inconsistent with the affirmative defense asserted in their answer that the plaintiff's claims were subject to arbitration.

Belchikov v. XTP Implementation Servs., Inc., NY Slip Op 02054 (2d Dep't April 9, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Leave to Renew

A motion for leave to renew based on an alleged change in the law must be made before entry of a final judgment or before expiration of the time to appeal.

U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Gallant, NY Slip Op 02141 (1st Dep't April 10, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Default judgments.

On a motion pursuant to CPLR 3215 for leave to enter a default judgment, a plaintiff is required to submit proof of service of the summons and complaint, proof of the facts constituting the claim, and proof of the defendant's default in answering or appearing. Then, the defendant must show either that there was no default or that there was a reasonable excuse for the delay and a potentially meritorious defense. The determination as to whether an excuse is reasonable is committed to the sound discretion of the motion court. Ongoing settlement negotiations may constitute a reasonable excuse for a default.

Arnav  Indus. Inc. Profit Sharing Plan & Trust v. 3449-3461 Hamilton Ft, LLC, NY Slip Op 02052 (2d Dep't April 9, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Hearsay: Party Admissions.

As an exception to the hearsay rule, a party admission is admissible against that party as evidence of the matter asserted, regardless of whether the statement was against the party's interest when the statement was made.

Vivar v. Citigroup Tech., Inc., NY Slip Op 02051 (1st Dep't April 8, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Sua sponte dismissal.

The court's power to dismiss a complaint sua sponte is to be exercised sparingly and only in extraordinary circumstances.

Wood v. Heni, NY Slip Op 01972 (2d Dep't April 2, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Premises liability.

Although landlords and permittees have a common-law duty to minimize foreseeable dangers on their property, including the criminal acts of third-parties, they are not the insurers of a visitor's safety. In cases arising out of injuries sustained on another's property, the scope of the possessor's duty is defined by past experience and the likelihood of third-person conduct which is likely to endanger the visitor's safety. A public establishment's owner has no duty to protect patrons against a harm that is unforeseeable and unexpected.

L.D. v. Brooklyn Kings Plaza, LLC, NY Slip Op 01906 (2d Dep't April 2, 2025)

Here is the decision.