LLC v. Jonathon Delaney, Defendant. (2026)

On November 15, 2005, a judgment in the amount of $12,989.63 was entered against Jonathon Delaney in Utica City Court, and on December 7, 2005, a transcript of that judgment was filed with the Oneida County Clerk, creating a lien upon any real property owned by him (NYSCEF Doc. No. 3). Thereafter, on April 24, 2017, the judgment was renewed and a new judgment in the amount of $26,611.45 was docketed under Index No. EFCA2016-002372, extending the lien for an additional ten years (NYSCEF Doc. No. 6).

In 2026, Plaintiff commenced this action by filing a summons dated April 27, 2026 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 1), followed by a notice of motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint (NYSCEF Doc. No. 2) and an amended notice of motion dated April 29, 2026 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 12). Plaintiff submitted an affirmation detailing the prior judgments and docketings (NYSCEF Doc. No. 3), an affidavit from its managing member describing the underlying debt, earlier filings, and the Defendant's known aliases (NYSCEF Doc. No. 4), and exhibits including the renewal judgment docketed in 2017 (Exhibit A, NYSCEF Doc. No. 6), an affidavit of non-military service (Exhibit B, NYSCEF Doc. No. 7), and a People-Search report confirming identifying information and aliases (Exhibit C, NYSCEF Doc. No. 8). Service was attempted on several dates and ultimately completed by nail-and-mail on May 12, 2026, followed by mailing on May 13, 2026 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 13). No responding papers were submitted by the Defendant.

Plaintiff now seeks summary judgment in lieu of complaint and entry of a renewal judgment pursuant to CPLR § 5014, together with the corresponding ten-year renewal of the judgment lien, and that motion is currently before the Court for determination.

In support of the requested relief, Plaintiff argues that it is entitled to summary judgment in lieu of complaint under CPLR § 3213 and that the judgment lien may be renewed pursuant to CPLR § 5014. Plaintiff asserts that the underlying debt was established through the 2005 judgment and that the renewed 2017 judgment continues to remain unsatisfied, with an updated amount due of $31,330.76 inclusive of interest and costs (NYSCEF Doc. No. 3). Plaintiff further contends that an action to renew a judgment may be commenced within ten years of the prior docketing and argues that neither CPLR § 5014 nor CPLR § 211(b) contains language limiting a judgment creditor to only one renewal (NYSCEF Doc. No. 3). Plaintiff also seeks to amend Defendant's name to include several aliases documented through a People-Search report, asserting that this amendment is necessary to ensure proper indexing and attachment of the lien (NYSCEF Doc. No. 4, 8). Based on these submissions, Plaintiff asks the Court to enter summary judgment in its favor, to direct the Clerk to docket a renewal judgment extending the lien for an additional ten years, and to amend the Defendant's name accordingly.

The underlying judgment was first docketed on December 7, 2005 and renewed once on April 24, 2017. Plaintiff now seeks a second renewal judgment, effectively continuing the lien beyond the statutory period authorized by CPLR § 5014.

CPLR § 5014 sets forth the narrow circumstances under which an action upon a money judgment may be maintained between the original parties. The statute provides that such an action may be commenced "during the year prior to the expiration of ten years since the first docketing of the judgment," and that any judgment obtained shall be designated a renewal judgment, with the lien of the renewal judgment taking effect upon expiration of ten years from the first docketing of the original judgment. The statutory language ties the renewal mechanism directly to the first docketing of the judgment and does not expressly contemplate the availability of successive renewals.

The courts have interpreted CPLR § 5014 consistently with this structure. In Gletzer v. Harris, 12 NY3d 468, 473 (2009), the Court of Appeals explained that, because a judgment lien on real property "is viable for just 10 years (see CPLR § 5203[a])," a judgment creditor may apply under CPLR § 5014 "to extend the lien for an additional 10-year period." The Court emphasized that CPLR § 5014 allows the creditor to "renew his lien" during the tenth year, and addressed the statute in terms of a single renewal window tied to the original lien. The Court further stated, "a renewal action may be brought between the same parties to the original action during the tenth year to extend the lien for an additional 10-year period." (Gletzer v Harris, 12 NY3d 468, 473 [2009]). This language identifies one renewal period, not an indefinite series of renewals.

Similarly, in Emerald Investors Ltd. v. Toms, the Appellate Division acknowledged that a renewal judgment results in "a new 20-year judgment and a corresponding 10-year lien," again describing only the renewal available after ten years have elapsed since the first docketing of the judgment (133 AD3d 558 [1st Dep't 2015] [citing Gletzer]).

The Court is not aware of any authority—statutory or precedential—that would permit a second renewal judgment beyond that which CPLR § 5014 expressly provides. In light of the statute's plain language and its judicial construction, the Court is constrained to conclude that CPLR § 5014 does not authorize the additional renewal Plaintiff seeks. Accordingly, the branch of Plaintiff's motion requesting a second renewal judgment must be denied.

With respect to Plaintiff's request to amend Defendant's name, the Court finds such relief appropriate for purposes of accuracy in judgment indexing and administrative record-keeping. As the request is unopposed and ministerial in nature, it is granted.

Thus, after careful consideration of the papers identified at the outset of this Decision and Order, it is hereby

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's motion for a second renewal judgment pursuant to CPLR 5014 is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED, that Plaintiff's request to amend Defendant's name to "Jonathon Delaney a/k/a Jonathon L. Delaney a/k/a Jonathan Delaney a/k/a Jonathan L. Delaney" is GRANTED solely for the purpose of correcting the judgment record; and it is further

ORDERED, that no renewal lien shall issue, and the judgment lien previously renewed on April 24, 2017 shall expire by operation of law; and it is further

ORDERED, that this constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

Signed at Utica, New York this

____ day of __________, 2026.

E N T E R

Honorable Elizabeth Snyder Fortino, J.S.C.

Elizabeth Snyder Fortino, J.