Motions for summary judgment

The party moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact. A moving defendant cannot satisfy this burden merely by pointing to gaps in the plaintiff's case; it must affirmatively demonstrate the merits of its defense.

Chin v. Pacific 10, LLC, NY Slip Op 00343 (2d Dep't January 28, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Appellate practice

An issue is properly before the Appellate Division where the defendants did not raise it until their reply papers, but raised it in their opening brief on appeal and plaintiff, without objecting, responded to it substantively.

Fernandez v. Sukhdeep, NY Slip Op 00422 (1st Dep't January 29, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Contract law

A contractual provision assuming an obligation to indemnify a party for attorneys' fees must be strictly construed so as to avoid reading into it a duty which the parties did not intend to be assumed.

23-35 Bridge St., LLC v. Excel Automotive Tech Ctr., Inc., NY Slip Op 00337 (2d Dep't January 28, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Leave to amend

It is well-settled that leave to amend shall be freely given absent prejudice or surprise, pursuant to CPLR 3025[b]. The movant need not establish the merit of its proposed new allegations, but must simply show that the proffered amendment is not palpably insufficient or clearly devoid of merit.

Peck v. Milbank LLP, NY Slip Op 00322 (1st Dep't January 27, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Appellate practice

Dismissal of the appeal is warranted as to the parties that were not aggrieved by the order on appeal, pursuant to CPLR 5511. While the order may contain language or reasoning that these parties consider adverse to their interests, that does not accord them standing to take an appeal.

Rodriguez v. CB Devs., NY Slip Op 00326 (1st Dep't January 22, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Contract law

A contract may be voided on the ground of economic duress where the complaining party was compelled to agree to its terms by means of a wrongful threat which precluded the exercise of its free will. Financial pressure and an unequal bargaining position do not constitute economic duress. The threatened party must establish that it could not obtain the goods from another source of supply and that the ordinary remedy of an action for breach of contract would be inadequate.

Southern Israel Bridging Fund Two, L.P. v. Orgenesis, Inc., NY Slip Op 00328 (1st Dep't January 22, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Dismissal as abandoned

CPLR 3215(c) directs that "[i]f the plaintiff fails to take proceedings for the entry of judgment within one year after the default, the court shall not enter judgment but shall dismiss the complaint as abandoned, without costs, upon its own initiative . . . , unless sufficient cause is shown why the complaint should not be dismissed." However, pursuant to CPLR 3408(n), the one-year deadline is tolled while mandatory settlement conferences are pending.

Bank of Am., N.A. v. Keefer, NY Slip Op 00231 (2d Dep't January 21, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Contract law

The right to assert a fraud or other tort claim related to a contract or note does not automatically transfer with the respective instrument. There must be some language - although no specific words are required - to evince the parties' intent and effectuate the conveyance of such a right. 

BH 336 Partners LLC v. Sentinel Real Estate Corp., NY Slip Op 00305 (1st Dep't January 22, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Striking a pleading

Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion to strike defendants' pleadings, pursuant to CPLR 3126. The record does not demonstrate that defendants' conduct was clearly willful and contumacious so as to warrant such a harsh sanction.

Naramore v. Mount Sinai Health Sys., Inc., NY Slip Op 00226 (1st Dep't January 20, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over a collateral attack on personal jurisdiction in a prior action. If personal jurisdiction over a party was not properly obtained in an earlier action, its remedy is to move to vacate the default judgment in that action, pursuant to CPLR 5015[a][4].

224 Lefferts Ave. Hous. Dev. Fund Corp. v. Haile, NY Slip Op 00227 (2d Dep't January 21, 2026)

Here is the decision.

Commercial litigation

Supreme Court improperly dismissed the misappropriation of trade secrets cause of action as asserted against the individual defendants. Supreme Court considered only whether they completely dominated the corporation with respect to the transaction at issue, and found no basis to pierce the corporate veil. However, even where the corporate veil is not pierced, a corporate officer who participates in and benefits from the commission of a tort may  be held individually liable. There is sufficient evidence that the individual defendants, for their personal gain, participated in the corporate defendant's allegedly tortious acts, thus raising issues of material fact as to their personal liability. The claim for misappropriation of trade secrets as against them is reinstated.

Century First Credit Solutions, Inc. v. Priority Capital, LLC, NY Slip Op 00224 (1st Dep't January 20, 2026)

Here is the decision.