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.
2834-2838 BRIGHTON 3RD STREET CONDOMINIUM, Respondent, v. Anna BAZINIAN, Appellant.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, without costs, and the action is dismissed without prejudice.
In this commercial claims action, plaintiff condominium association seeks to recover common charges and late fees from defendant, the owner of a condominium unit, as well as costs related to actions defendant or the occupants of her condominium unit allegedly took with respect to an electric panel located in defendant's unit. At a nonjury trial, plaintiff appeared pro se by its witness, board member Tanya Josovich. Defendant testified and submitted evidence which was intended to refute plaintiff's claims. Following the trial, the Civil Court awarded plaintiff the principal sum of $2,242.
This action was erroneously commenced in the name of a condominium, as it is apparently organized as an unincorporated association. Since such an entity has no legal existence separate and apart from its individual members (see Vincent C. Alexander, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C1025:2; see also Pascual v Rustic Woods Homeowners Assn., Inc., 134 AD3d 1006, 1006 [2015]), the action should have been brought by the condominium association's president or treasurer, rather than in the name of the condominium itself (see General Associations Law § 12; CPLR 1025). While this error was correctible (see Matter of Stephentown Concerned Citizens v Herrick, 223 AD2d 862, 864 n 2 [1996]; Concerned Citizens of Albany-Shaker Rd. v State of New York, 140 AD2d 842, 843 [1988]), it was not corrected (see Westport Condominium Assn. v Mayzel, 62 Misc 3d 140[A], 2019 NY Slip Op 50066[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th & 13th Jud Dists 2019] ). We note that the record fails to establish Ms. Josovich's authority to appear on plaintiff's behalf.
In view of the foregoing, we find that the judgment failed to render substantial justice between the parties (see CCA 1804-A, 1807-A) and that the action must be dismissed without prejudice.
We reach no other issue.
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and the action is dismissed without prejudice.
WESTON, J.P., ELLIOT and SIEGAL, JJ., concur.
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.
Docket No: 2018-872 K C
Decided: January 31, 2020
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Term, 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)