The parties do not have to wait until the summary judgment stage for a court to interpret a contract as courts routinely interpret contracts on CPLR 3211(a)(7) motions.
South32 Chile Copper Holdings Pty Ltd v. Sumitomo Metal Min. Co., Ltd., NY Slip Op 02892 (1st Dep't May 13, 2025)
Where the original lease includes an option to renew, the tenant's exercise of it does not create a new lease; rather, it is a prolongation of the original agreement for a further period.
3604 Jerome, LLC v. NYC Health & Hosps. Corp., NY Slip Op 02864 (1st Dep't May 13, 2025)
Liability for a dangerous condition on real property must be predicated on ownership, occupancy, control, or special use of the property, any one of which is sufficient to give rise to a duty of care. In the absence of one of these predicates, a party cannot be held liable for injuries caused by the dangerous or defective condition of the property.
Annabi v. BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc., NY Slip Op 02751 (2d Dep't May 7, 2025)
Plaintiff established prima facie that the parties' settlement agreement constituted an instrument for the payment of money only and that defendants defaulted by failing to make payment under its terms, pursuant to CPLR 3213. On its motion, plaintiff submitted the settlement agreement, the amount due, and an affirmation of its general counsel, who swore to the loan history under penalty of perjury and stated that he was familiar with the facts through his "review of the records and documents kept in the file maintained by [plaintiff] with respect to this matter." The settlement agreement, which was signed by plaintiff and defendants, provided that defendants owed $7,900,000 as of October 12, 2012; that the maturity date was October 12th, 2017, the fifth anniversary date of the settlement agreement; that the interest rate was 0% a year for the first 18 months and then 5% a year thereafter, without compounding interest; and that upon default, interest was to accrue at the rate of 12% per annum.
In opposition, defendants failed to raise a triable issue as to a defense to the instrument. In light of defendants' express waiver of defenses in the loan agreement and their acknowledgement that their repayment obligation was unconditional, their potential counterclaims and affirmative defenses did not preclude CPLR 3213 relief. In addition, the settlement agreement specifies that default interest accrues on default and that payment is due on demand. The settlement agreement does not require that notice of demand be sent to the borrower.
LFR Collections, LLC. v. Tammy Tran Attorneys at Law, L.P., NY Slip Op 02852 (1st Dep't May 8, 2025)
A lack of certainty as to exactly what preceded plaintiff's fall does not raise an issue of fact so as to preclude summary judgment.
Begonja v. Hudson Riv. Park Trust, NY Slip Op 02841 (1st Dep't May 8, 2025)
Necessary parties are those "who ought to be parties if complete relief is to be accorded between the persons who are parties to the action or who might be inequitably affected by a judgment in the action," pursuant to CPLR 1001[a].
Matter of Wohl v. Bruen, NY Slip Op 02861 (2d Dep't May 9, 2025)
A party seeking to vacate an order entered upon a default in opposing a motion must submit evidence in admissible form establishing both a reasonable excuse for the default and a potentially meritorious opposition to the motion. A court has discretion to accept law office failure as a reasonable excuse where the claim is supported by a detailed and credible explanation of the default. Vague, conclusory, and unsubstantiated allegations of law office failure are insufficient.
Agostinacchio v. Jofaz Transp., Inc., NY Slip Op 02750 (2d Dep't May 7, 2025)
After entry of a final judgment, a motion for leave to renew pursuant to CPLR 2221(e)(2) based upon a change in the law that would change the prior determination must be made before the time to appeal the final judgment has expired, absent circumstances set forth in CPLR 5015.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Eliacin, NY Slip Op 02621 (2d Dep't April 30, 2025)
A claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing may not be used as a substitute for a non-viable contract claim.
Embarq, L.L.C. v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co., N.A., NY Slip Op 02643 (1st Dep't May 1, 2025)
On a failure to warn claim, the defendant may establish its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by demonstrating that any allegedly inadequate warnings were not a proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries, that is., that additional or different warnings would not have deterred the plaintiff's misuse of the product. The defendant may meet its burden with testimony establishing that the plaintiff did not read the instructions or the owner's manual.
Ardi v. Miller, NY Slip Op 02641 (1st Dep't May 1, 2025)
