Mikolaj Szczesiak v. ERY Tenant LLC, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
A construction worker fell when an old A‑frame ladder moved after a mild electric shock while he worked on ceiling lights. The First Department reversed and granted him summary judgment under Labor Law § 240(1), finding the ladder defective and that safer devices were available. The decision confirms that a wobbling or defective ladder can establish liability even if some power remains on, and comparative fault is no defense.
Read more:
Click here
Joel Fisher, etc. v. Hudson Hall LLC d/b/a Mercado Little Spain, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
An employee sued Mercado Little Spain for unpaid overtime, alleging time‑shaving, automatic meal‑break deductions, and off‑the‑clock work. The First Department dismissed the § 193 wage‑deduction and wage‑notice claims and found no standalone § 198(3) claim, but otherwise affirmed, allowing the overtime claims to proceed. The decision confirms the No Wage Theft Loophole Act is not retroactive and that detailed facts can sustain wage claims without precise statutory citations.
Read more:
Click here
Regina Goss-Lawson v. Matco Service Corporation and 'John Doe' (Appellate Division, First Department, February 3, 2026)
Plaintiff stopped in traffic and was rear-ended; the trial court denied her motion for summary judgment on liability. The First Department reversed and granted the plaintiff summary judgment, holding that a driver who rear-ends a stopped vehicle is presumed at fault and a bare claim of a sudden stop is not enough. The decision also confirms plaintiffs need not disprove their own comparative fault to obtain summary judgment on liability.
Read more:
Click here
Nelson Guadalupe Coronel v. Marcal Contract Co., LLC, et al.; Third-Party: Marcal Contract Co., LLC, et al. v. Capital Concrete NY, Inc. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 3, 2026)
In a construction injury case, the First Department upheld summary judgment for the worker under Labor Law § 240(1) after a concrete form fell about 15 feet and struck him. The First Department dismissed the § 200 and common-law negligence claims against general contractor Marcal and granted contractual indemnification to Marcal and the owner against subcontractor Capital. The decision reinforces absolute liability for elevation risks, limits § 200 exposure for GCs with only general oversight, and enforces broad indemnity when the GC/owner are not negligent.
Read more:
Click here
Shakhriyor Khusenov v. Dilorom Tursunova (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
This divorce case turned on whether the wife was properly served before a 2014 default judgment. The First Department vacated the judgment as invalid because the husband could not prove service and remanded for further proceedings, including possible attorneys’ fees. The decision confirms that judgments entered without proper service are invalid and can be challenged at any time, and that plaintiffs must prove service.
Read more:
Click here
Juan Siguencia v. The Hudson Companies Incorporated, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
A worker was injured when unsecured, leaning doorframes toppled at a construction site. The First Department affirmed Labor Law § 240(1) liability against the owner and general contractor, and dismissed all claims against the hoist/crane subcontractors for lack of evidence tying them to storing or securing the frames. The decision underscores that owners and general contractors face Scaffold Law exposure for unsecured materials, while subcontractors are not liable absent proof of their fault.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Markiem Black (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
The First Department vacated the guilty plea and dismissed the Superior Court Information (SCI) because the defendant did not personally sign the indictment waiver in open court; the judge’s initials during a remote appearance were not enough. The ruling confirms that strict, in-court signatures are required for indictment waivers, or the prosecution by SCI is invalid.
Read more:
Click here
Unitrin Safeguard Insurance Company v. Ciro Della-Noce, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
This no‑fault insurance/provider dispute turned on whether Unitrin properly served two defendants. The First Department vacated the default judgment against Edward Mosquea and Wandy De La Cruz‑Ramos because De La Cruz‑Ramos had moved and Unitrin did not do enough before resorting to nail‑and‑mail on Mosquea. The ruling underscores strict compliance with New York service rules and that a defendant need not show a defense when service is defective.
Read more:
Click here
CS Leveraged Loan Funding 2021 LLC et al. v. Bank of America, N.A. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
This case involves a Bloomberg Chat loan trade, a disqualified-institution list, and LSTA settlement duties. The First Department vacated an $11.3 million judgment for Bank of America, dismissed claims against Black Diamond, and remanded the contract claim against CS Leveraged Loan Funding. It matters because DQ status hinges on name-recognizable affiliation, LSTA duties on timely and equivalent settlement can defeat early judgment, and substituting a buyer can wipe out prior liability.
Read more:
Click here
A1 Specialized, Inc. v. James River Insurance Company, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
This case asked whether an unsigned change order could count as the written agreement needed to make A1 an additional insured under a commercial general liability policy. The First Department reinstated A1’s suit and held James River must defend, finding the change order, the contractor’s work, and a certificate of insurance showed intent even without a signature. The decision confirms in New York that an unsigned writing, backed by objective evidence, can confer additional insured status and trigger the duty to defend.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Latrese Carr (Appellate Division, First Department, February 3, 2026)
This case was about enforcing a conditional plea deal where the trial court forgot to undo one plea after the defendant met all conditions. The First Department modified the judgment to remove the first-degree reckless endangerment plea and left the attempted count and 1.5 to 3 year sentence in place. It confirms that appellate courts will enforce plea bargains and fix clerical omissions to match the agreed terms.
Read more:
Click here
Roberto Adago v. Abdou Rahame Sy, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
This contract dispute over an arbitration clause led the trial court to enter a $701,363 default after remand. The First Department reversed and sent the case back because proper notice of entry was never served, NYSCEF emails are not service, and a defect in an out-of-state affidavit was curable. The ruling reminds courts to follow the appellate mandate and favor decisions on the merits.
Read more:
Click here
64 West 10th Street LLC v. L-Ray LLC, doing business as ALTA, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, February 3, 2026)
This case involved a landlord seeking to enforce a personal guaranty and recover attorneys’ fees after a tenant defaulted under a 2018 continuation lease. The First Department reinstated the claims against the guarantor and granted summary judgment to the landlord, holding the guaranty was absolute, stayed in effect until vacant possession was delivered in June 2024, and that the 2018 lease carried forward the attorneys’ fees provision. The ruling confirms that guaranties tied to vacant possession can bind guarantors beyond lease expiration, especially when they sign a successor lease.
Read more:
Click here
The People of the State of New York v. Jalen Doctor (Appellate Division, First Department, February 3, 2026)
The First Department invalidated the appeal waiver in a guilty-plea first-degree rape case and, in the interest of justice, vacated the mandatory surcharge and fees; it otherwise affirmed the conviction, 7-year prison term, and 10 years of postrelease supervision. The court emphasized that judges must clearly explain on the record that the right to appeal is separate from rights lost by a guilty plea, and a written waiver cannot fix a poor oral explanation.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Roberson Ortiz (Appellate Division, First Department, February 5, 2026)
The First Department modified a probation sentence after a firearm guilty plea. It kept a possible curfew and standard conduct rules, but removed alcohol/drug testing and surcharges/fees because there was no link to substance use and the indigent defendant’s payments were not tied to rehabilitation. The court also emphasized that a valid appeal waiver blocks review of excessive-sentence claims.
Read more:
Click here
Dispensa v. Medical Diagnostic Imaging, PLLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
A medical malpractice case alleged a missed diagnosis of an optic nerve meningioma that caused permanent vision loss. The Second Department upheld $1.1 million for past and $350,000 for future pain and suffering, but vacated the $250,000 loss-of-services award and ordered a new trial unless the plaintiff agrees to $50,000. The ruling highlights that derivative loss-of-services damages face closer scrutiny, even when pain-and-suffering awards stand.
Read more:
Click here
GIT Capital, LLC v. Alexis (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
This case centers on a quiet title dispute after a tax deed sale, complicated by a clerk indexing error that obscured the owners’ recorded deed. The Second Department vacated the default judgment that had awarded title to GIT Capital and allowed the owners to file an answer. The decision signals that courts may set aside defaults in the interest of justice when record-keeping errors affect notice, and leaves cancellation of the tax deed for later.
Read more:
Click here
The People ex rel. Anna Boksenbaum, on behalf of Robert Reid v. Lynelle Maginley-Liddie (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 2, 2026)
The case asked whether a new felony committed while on parole makes a charge bail-eligible under New York’s bail law. The Second Department held that parole doesn’t qualify (only probation or postrelease supervision do) and third-degree drug possession isn’t bail-eligible, so the bail ruling was wrong and the case was sent back to reconsider release.
Read more:
Click here
Abruzzese v. Pisacano (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
This quiet title case asks whether an ambiguous earlier deed or a later correction deed conveyed an East Marion property. The Second Department reinstated the case, setting aside the defendant’s summary judgment and keeping the denial of the plaintiff’s motion. Factual disputes about deed meaning and delivery/acceptance must be tried, and courts cannot grant summary judgment by searching the record when such issues remain.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Dickey (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
People v. Dickey addressed the length of sentencing orders of protection and the scope of an appeal waiver. The Second Department upheld the appeal waiver and declined unpreserved challenges, but vacated the orders’ expiration dates for failing to credit jail time and sent the case back to recalculate. It confirms defendants can challenge an order’s duration on appeal when the court never announced it on the record.
Read more:
Click here
People ex rel. Manley, on behalf of Evans v. Toulon (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 2, 2026)
This case challenged a defendant’s pretrial jailing as unreasonable. The Second Department granted habeas relief, set substantial bail with strict conditions like electronic monitoring and home confinement, and ordered release once those are met. The decision confirms habeas can secure reasonable bail and lets courts require monitoring and other safeguards under CPL 510.40(4).
Read more:
Click here
The People ex rel. David A. Arpino, on behalf of Conrod Getten v. Michael J. Franchi, et al. (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 3, 2026)
This case challenged Conrod Getten’s continued pretrial detention and sought release or reasonable bail. The Second Department, on consent, set a specific bail package with electronic monitoring, passport surrender, and an extradition waiver, and ordered release once conditions are met. It confirms habeas can be used to obtain a tailored bail arrangement under CPL 510.40.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Leon, Douglas (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
This case centered on the length of a post-judgment order of protection after a third-degree robbery plea and related sentencing challenges. The Second Department modified the order to expire on March 1, 2031 because the original date exceeded CPL 530.13(4)(A), and the issue was reviewable since the duration was not announced at sentencing. It otherwise affirmed the conviction and sentence, rejecting the claim that immigration consequences made the sentence cruel and unusual as unpreserved and meritless.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Gardner (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
The Second Department removed the “sexually violent offender” label from Richard Gardner but kept his level-three sex offender classification. The court held his federal conviction for receiving child pornography is not a qualifying sexually violent offense under SORA. It otherwise upheld points for substance abuse and expulsion from treatment and denied a downward departure, confirming these factors can support a level-three rating.
Read more:
Click here
Wilmington Trust, National Association v. Pacific Street Services, Inc., et al.; 55 Chester, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
A mortgage foreclosure dispute asked whether the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA) retroactively made a previously timely case time-barred. The Second Department reinstated the lender’s summary judgment and ordered foreclosure, finding the suit was timely when filed and that FAPA’s CPLR 205-a did not apply; it also confirmed the referee’s report based on business records. The decision underscores that the statute of limitations runs to filing, and renewal isn’t warranted unless a legal change would alter the outcome.
Read more:
Click here
In the Matter of Zerina H. (Anonymous) (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
The case involved alleged abusive head trauma (shaken baby) after a two-month-old was hospitalized with brain bleeding. The Second Department dismissed the petition against the mother and affirmed dismissal as to the father, crediting the mother’s expert and finding ACS failed to meet its burden. The ruling shows that in shaken-baby cases, a credible alternative medical cause and evidence of responsible caregiving can overcome an initial showing of abuse.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of Jimmy Wagner v. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
Jimmy Wagner sought COVID-19 vaccine-related emails and records from NYC’s Health Department under FOIL. The Second Department ordered the release of specific documents and awarded attorneys’ fees, finding the agency’s privacy and internal-communications claims were too vague and lacked a reasonable basis. The decision reinforces that agencies must give specific reasons to withhold records, and that fees are mandatory when requesters substantially prevail.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of Wagner v. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
Jimmy Wagner sought COVID-19 vaccine records under New York’s Freedom of Information Law, but the Health Department kept extending deadlines without a firm date or notice of appeal rights. The Second Department reversed the denial of attorneys’ fees, found the delays amounted to a denial, and sent the case back to set the fee amount. The decision makes clear that open-ended extensions based only on workload violate FOIL and can lead to mandatory fee awards.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of David A. Cutner v. City of Rye Board of Appeals (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
The case asked whether a City of Rye property could operate a full-service restaurant as a permitted use or only as a grandfathered nonconforming use. The Second Department reversed and set aside the Board’s approval of the certificate of occupancy, finding the site does not meet the Code’s location rules for a permitted restaurant and sending it back to decide any nonconforming-use status and lapse. It matters because clear zoning text controls and courts will not defer to a board’s contrary reading.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of Castaldo v. Mondiello, individually and as trustee of the Dorothy Castaldo Irrevocable Trust (Appellate Division, Second Department, February 4, 2026)
The case challenged a mother’s 2019 use of a trust’s limited power of appointment to change the remainder, alleging it required beneficiary consent and resulted from undue influence. The Second Department dismissed the petition, holding the trust authorized the change without consent and that petitioner showed no triable undue influence. The decision confirms that an express limited power of appointment does not trigger EPTL 7-1.9 consent and that unsupported undue influence claims will not defeat summary judgment.
Read more:
Click here