JAIME TRELLES ASTUDILLO v. << (2026)

 _  

Greenberg & Stein, New York (Ian Asch of counsel), for Jaime Trelles Astudillo, respondent.

Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, LLP, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for Subin Associates, LLP, respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Mary V. Rosado, J.), entered February 18, 2025, which denied third-party defendant/second third-party defendant Arsenal Scaffold Inc.'s motion for a stay and investigation, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly denied as an improper attempt to reargue or renew the prior order to show cause to be relieved as counsel brought by nonparty intervenor-respondent Subin Associates, LLP. Arsenal did not oppose that motion and offers no explanation for its failure to do so (see generally Askins v. Santos, 246 AD3d 487, 488 [1st Dept 2026] ).

In any event, there is no basis to stay this action or initiate a fraud investigation because there is no evidence of any fraud in this case (cf.  Devore v. Pfizer Inc., 58 AD3d 138, 144 [1st Dept 2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 703 [2009] ).  Arsenal is correct that Subin has an obligation under New York Rules of Professional Conduct (22 NYCRR 1200.0) rule 3.3(a) and (b) to “take reasonable remedial measures” with respect to any known fraud.  However, since there is no indication that there has been fraud in this case, there is no basis to compel Subin to disclose anything further at this time.

We decline to reach the parties' arguments regarding Arsenal's standing to seek the requested relief and the appropriateness of sanctions against Arsenal, which were raised for the first time on appeal.  We also decline to reach the parties' arguments with

respect to the appropriateness of a conditional dismissal or preclusion order because they are premature.

In view of our disposition of these issues, we need not reach the parties' remaining arguments.