A referee's report.

The report of a referee should be confirmed whenever the findings are substantially supported by the record and the referee has clearly defined the issues and resolved matters of credibility. The referee's findings and recommendations are advisory only and have no binding effect on the court, which remains the ultimate arbiter of the dispute.

Wilmington Sav. Fund Socy., FSB. v. Blick, NY Slip Op 03601 (2d Dep't June 11, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Motions to dismiss.

The motion to dismiss the complaint as abandoned under CPLR 3215(c) is untimely when it is made after the entry of a judgment of foreclosure and sale.

HSBC Bank USA v. Amponsah, NY Slip Op 03631 (1st Dep't June 12, 2025)

Here is the decision.

An attorney's liability.

Absent a showing of fraud, collusion, or a malicious or tortious act, an attorney is not liable to third parties for purported injuries caused by services performed on behalf of a client or advice offered to that client.

Garanin v. Hiatt, NY Slip Op 03555 (2d Dep't June 11, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Contract law.

Unjust enrichment is a quasi-contract claim that does not lie where there is an actual agreement between the parties.

Ceratosaurus Invs., LLC v. B2C Alternative Equity, LLC, NY Slip Op 03630 (1st Dep't June 12, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Continental Army 1775.

Foreclosure actions.

An action to foreclose a mortgage is governed by a six-year statute of limitations, pursuant to CPLR 213[4]. Here, the mortgage debt was accelerated and the statute of limitations began to run when the prior foreclosure action was commenced and the entire amount secured by the mortgage was called due. Pursuant to CPLR 3217(e), the voluntary discontinuance of the prior action did not serve to revive or reset the statute of limitations.

Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. v. Williams, NY Slip Op 03552 (2d Dep't June 11, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Appellate practice.

Where an appeal is perfected by the appendix method, the appendix must contain all the relevant portions of the record in order to enable the court to render an informed decision on the merits of the appeal, pursuant to CPLR 5528[a][5] and 22 NYCRR 1250.7[d][1]. Here, the appendix does not include the complete transcript of the hearing held before the Supreme Court. The appeal is dismissed.

Connolly v. Nina, NY Slip Op 03551 (2d Dep't June 11, 2025)

Here is the decision.

The MTA's liability

It is well settled, as a matter of law, that the MTA's functions regarding public transportation are limited to financing and planning, and do not include the operation, maintenance, and control of any facility. The MTA is not vicariously liable for the torts of its subsidiaries such as MTA Bus Company.  The MTA and its subsidiaries are not responsible for each other's torts, and they must be sued separately.

Chen v. Metropolitan Tr. Auth., NY Slip Op 03301 (2d Dep't June 4, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Easements.

An express grant of easement is not extinguished merely because the necessity for the easement ceases, or through mere non-use. Once an easement is created by grant, it can be extinguished only by abandonment, conveyance, condemnation, or adverse possession. In order to prove abandonment, there must be both the intention to abandon and also some overt act or failure to act which implies that the owner neither claims nor retains any interest in the easement. The acts relied upon must be unequivocal, and must clearly demonstrate the owner's intention to permanently relinquish all rights to the easement.

Carp v. Shapiro, NY Slip Op 03300 (2d Dep't June 4, 2025)

Here is the decision.

Contract law.

Clear, complete, and unambiguous contractual terms are to be enforced according to their plain meaning. A determination of unconscionability requires a showing that the contract, when made, was both procedurally and substantively unconscionable. Equity will not relieve a party of its obligations under a contract merely because subsequently, with the benefit of hindsight, it appears to have been a bad bargain.

McCann v. Ship Wrecked Bar & Grill, Inc., NY Slip Op 03388 (1st Dep't June 5, 2025) 

Here is the decision.

Death of a party.

Generally, the death of a party divests a court of jurisdiction to act, and automatically stays proceedings in the action pending the substitution of a personal representative for the decedent. However, where a party's death does not affect the merits of a case, there is no need for strict adherence to the requirement that the proceedings be stayed pending substitution.

Bethpage Fed. Credit Union v. Hughes, NY Slip Op 03298 (2d Dep't June 4, 2025)

Here is the decision.