Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
CURTIS PARTITIONS CORP., Plaintiff, v. HALPERN CONSTRUCTION, INC., Defendant-Respondent, 2 Broadway LLC, Defendant-Appellant, 2 Broadway Development, LLC, et al., Defendants.
Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (John E.H. Stackhouse, J.), entered October 18, 2005, after a nonjury trial, granting defendant contractor Halpern's cross claims to foreclose mechanic's liens against defendant premises owner 2 Broadway LLC, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The disposition was supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence and should not be disturbed (Watts v. State of New York, 25 A.D.3d 324, 809 N.Y.S.2d 5 [2006] ). The lienor was entitled to foreclose, based on credible evidence at trial that it had performed its contracts on time, to the best of its ability. To the extent it failed to meet its deadlines, the lienor was blameless for the delays. There was ample evidence, based on the conduct and attitude of the owner during the construction process, that it had knowledge of and consented to the work (see National Wall Paper Co. v. Sire, 163 N.Y. 122, 131, 57 N.E. 293 [1900]; M & B Plumbing & Heating Co. v. Cammarota, 103 A.D.2d 879, 477 N.Y.S.2d 901 [1984] ). The charge for premium time was a “lienable” item.
The court properly rejected the defense that a mechanic's lien could not be filed because the work was for a public improvement (compare Lien Law § 3 and § 5). This property was privately owned, and the owner was ultimately responsible for the costs.
We have considered the owner's remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: September 20, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)