Jelly Tollo, Petitioner, v. Goodfriend Self Storage, Respondent (2026)

Recitation, as required by CPLR 2219(a), of the papers considered in review of this motion:

Papers Numbered

Order to Show Cause, annexed Exhibits and Affidavits/Affirmations 1

Answering Affidavits/Affirmations and Exhibits 2

Reply Affidavits/Affirmations

Upon the foregoing cited papers, petitioner order to show cause is granted for the following reason(s):

Petitioner, appearing as self-represented, commenced this proceeding, pursuant to Lien Law § 201-a, to cancel the lien filed against her personal property on the grounds that the lien is invalid. On August 8, 2022, plaintiff entered into an occupancy agreement with defendant wherein plaintiff rented two storage units, unit 4017 and unit 0007 ("Agreement"). Under the Agreement, the monthly rent was to be paid on or before the first day of each month. If rent was not paid within five days of when rent is due, there would be a late charge of $10.00. If the rent remained unpaid fifteen days after when rent is due, then a second late fee of $25.00 would be charged. The Agreement provided that if plaintiff defaults in paying rent, defendant may, among other things, "enforce the lien by selling personal property stored by occupant at the self-storage facility in accordance with Lien Law 182" (defendant's, Exhibit B ¶9).

Petitioner contends that she received a text from respondent on December 12, 2025, informing her that respondent would sell her property on December 22, 2025. Petitioner further contends that due to payment errors made by her bank, payment was not made to respondent.

Respondent opposes asserting that, beginning in January 2025, petitioner defaulted in paying rent on unit 0007 and that beginning in May 2025, petitioner defaulted in paying the rent on unit 4017. By two separate Lien Notices, one for each of the respective units, dated December 5, 2025, respondent advised that petitioner's payments were delinquent and indicated that unless payment was made by December 6, 2025 at 1:51 p.m., the property would be sold at public auction on December 22, 2025 at 1:00 p.m. ("Lien Notices"). Respondent avers that during the periods of default, petitioner submitted payments on both accounts by credit card but had the charged subsequently reversed. Respondent further avers that petitioner also tendered multiple checks that were returned for insufficient funds. According to respondent, in late November 2025, petitioner advised respondent that she had filed for bankruptcy and that based on that representation, respondent thereafter cancelled the lien sales scheduled for December 22, 2025.

Pursuant to Lien Law § 182(9), "[t]he special proceeding may be brought in any court which would have jurisdiction to render a judgment for a sum equal to the amount of the lien." If the person who commences that proceeding "show[s] that the owner is not entitled to claim a lien in the goods, or that all or part of the amount claimed by the owner has not been properly charged to the account of such person, or, as the case may be, that all or part of such amount exceeds the fair and reasonable value of the services performed by the owner, the court shall direct the entry of judgment cancelling the lien or reducing the amount claimed thereunder accordingly," with a directive that "the person shall be entitled to possession of the property" if the lien is cancelled (id. § 182[9]).

Lien Law § 182(7)(a) provides that

"[a]n owner's lien may be enforced by public or private sale of the ... goods [of the occupant, defined under Lien Law § 182(1)(c) as a person entitled to the use of the storage space at a self-storage facility under a written occupancy agreement to the exclusion of others,] that remain in the self-storage facility, in block, or in parcel, at any time or place and on any terms which are commercially reasonable after notice to all persons known to claim an interest in the goods."

The notice that must be provided by the owner to enforce the lien by public or private sale "shall include an itemized statement of the amount due, the description of the property subject to the lien, the nature of the proposed sale, a demand for payment within a specified time not less than thirty days from mailing of the notice and a conspicuous statement that unless the claimant pays within that time the goods will be advertised for sale and sold at public or private sale in a commercially reasonable manner" (id.).

In addition, the notice must "include the time and place of any public or private sale and it shall state that any person claiming an interest in the goods is entitled to bring a proceeding hereunder within ten days of the service of the notice if he [or she] disputes the validity of the lien, or the amount claimed " (id. [emphasis added]).

The "courts generally allow pro se litigants some leeway in the presentation of their case" (2215-75 Cruger Apartments, Inc. v Stovel, 196 Misc 2d 346, 348 [App term, 1st Dept] [quoting Stoves & Stones, Ltd. v Rubens, 237 AD2d 280 [2d Dept 1997]). Here, petitioner asserts that she received a text from respondent ten (10) days before the date of the auction and essentially contends that the lien is defective due to respondent's failure to comply with the notice requirements under Lien Law § 182(7)(a). Notably, the Lien Notices demanded payment by the following day at 1:00 p.m. The Lien Notices wholly failed to comply with the requirement that payment be demanded in not less than thirty days from the mailing of the notice. Further, the Court notes that the Lien Notice for unit 4017 failed to advise petitioner that she is entitled to bring a proceeding within ten days of service of the notice to dispute the validity of the lien. Consequently, the court finds the lien invalid.

Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED, that petitioner's application is granted and the lien is canceled; and it is further

ORDERED, that upon service of a copy of the judgment together with notice of entry thereof upon respondent, by certified mail, return receipt requested within thirty (30) days of the date of entry, petitioner shall be entitled to possession of the property.

This constitutes the decision and order of this court.

Date 4/10/2026

Hon. Alice Tam Tien, JCC

Alice Tam Tien, J.