The People of the State of New York v. Marcus T. (Appellate Division, First Department, August 6, 2026)
The First Department vacated a young defendant’s sentence and sent the case back again because the sentencing judge appeared confused about the facts when denying youthful offender treatment. The court said judges must meaningfully consider that status for eligible defendants, and the decision matters because it reinforces that a youth cannot be denied that protection without a clear, informed review of the actual case.
The People of the State of New York v. Steven Hernandez (Appellate Division, First Department, August 6, 2026)
The First Department upheld Steven Hernandez’s guilty plea and three-year sentence for attempted weapon possession, rejecting his claim that New York’s gun licensing law is unconstitutional under Bruen. The court said he could raise a broad challenge to the law despite his appeal waiver, but that challenge failed, while his age-based claim was barred by the waiver; the only change was that the court removed the sentencing surcharge and fees.
Bolivar Carchi Ordonez v. USM Asset Trust Series-7, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, August 6, 2026)
The First Department reinstated a construction worker’s claim that owners and contractors may be liable after he fell on a cracked exterior step while carrying demolition debris, finding factual questions about whether the staircase was the only practical route for the job and qualified as a covered passageway. The court otherwise left most of the lower court’s ruling in place, but it threw out common-law indemnity and contribution claims against the worker’s employer because the worker received workers’ compensation benefits and there was no showing of a grave injury.
Roth v. Velasquez (Appellate Division, First Department, August 6, 2026)
The First Department ruled in a medical malpractice case over an alleged missed pulmonary embolism that the claims against the hospital may go forward, but it dismissed the claims against the emergency doctor, Dr. Velasquez. The court found there were factual disputes about whether the hospital should have done more testing, but the evidence did not show that Dr. Velasquez personally caused the delayed diagnosis, especially because later doctors made the key testing decisions.
Osborne v. Merchant Square Dental, PLLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department reinstated the dental malpractice claims against Merchant Square Dental, finding there were factual questions about whether the dentist who performed the extraction was really an independent contractor or was controlled by the practice. But it dismissed the claims against the practice’s principal, Syed Masihuddin, because the evidence showed he did not treat the patient or have a dentist-patient relationship with her.
DiCarlo v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In a personal injury case involving a pedestrian struck by an MTA bus, the Second Department upheld the jury’s finding that the transit defendants were 70% at fault and the plaintiff 30% at fault. But the court ruled that the pain-and-suffering award was too high and ordered a new trial on those damages unless the plaintiff agrees to reduce them to $750,000 for past pain and suffering and $1 million for future pain and suffering.
Jean Cawley, et al. v. Joseph Lambiase, Jr. (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department reversed a Suffolk County ruling in a dispute over ownership of part of a private road, Barns Lane, and held that the defendant owns the western portion of the disputed area up to the road’s centerline, subject to others’ easement rights. The court found that a 1960 deed had already conveyed that interest to the defendant’s predecessor, so the plaintiffs’ later 1973 deed could not transfer it again.
HSBC Bank USA, National Association v. Patricia Rini (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In this mortgage foreclosure dispute, the Second Department reversed an order that would have reopened the case after HSBC claimed the borrower breached a loan-modification settlement. The court held that once the parties filed an unconditional stipulation of discontinuance without saying the court would keep jurisdiction, the case was over and could not be revived by motion. This matters because parties who want a court to enforce a settlement later must clearly reserve that authority in their papers.
Rashawn Holmes v. 215 Knickerbocker, LLC, et al. (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
This slip-and-fall case involved a man who said he was injured on icy stairs at a Brooklyn property during an ongoing snowfall. The Second Department reinstated the lawsuit, finding the property owner, manager, and tenant had not shown the ice was caused only by the storm or that they lacked notice of a possible preexisting hazard. This matters because the “storm in progress” rule does not automatically shield property owners from liability when there are factual questions about older ice conditions.
Alava v. Buffalo Airport Car Rental (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In a personal injury case arising from a crash involving a rental car, the Second Department reinstated the claims against Buffalo Airport Car Rental after finding the company did not prove it was protected by the Graves Amendment. The court said the rental agreement had expired before the accident and the company also failed to show it was not negligent in maintaining the vehicle, which matters because rental-car owners must prove both points to avoid liability at an early stage.
ARLO 67, LLC v. Doyle (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department ruled that the Attorney General could pause a property partition-and-sale case for six months while investigating whether the plaintiff obtained its interest through deed theft or fraud. The court said the state does not have to prove fraud at this stage; it only needs a real, ongoing investigation, which matters because it gives government agencies a practical way to stop residential property sales before potentially stolen deeds are locked in.
ARLO 67, LLC v. Doyle (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department ruled that a Brooklyn property sale and related partition case must be paused for six months while the New York Attorney General investigates possible deed theft. The court said the Attorney General did not need to prove fraud or probable cause to get the stay, which matters because it sets a lower bar for stopping residential property cases during active title-fraud investigations.
Armstrong v. Dumbo Lofts Rental, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department reinstated tenants’ claims that a Brooklyn landlord improperly took apartments out of rent stabilization while receiving J-51 tax benefits and charged unlawful rents. The court said tenants do not have to prove every element of common-law fraud, including reliance, to pursue a fraudulent deregulation theory, and it found the landlord’s proof too weak to win the case before discovery, which matters because it makes it harder for landlords to defeat rent overcharge claims early.
Foote v. Foote (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In a dispute between brothers over the sale of jointly owned Nassau County property, The Second Department reinstated 2019 orders granting summary judgment, directing a sale, and requiring an accounting. The court held that the defendant gave up his right to challenge personal jurisdiction by participating in the case and discussing the merits without objecting, and it found that he had proper notice of the motion.
Nardone v. Tow Rific Auto Service, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In this personal injury case, the Second Department largely upheld a jury’s damages award after a fall on property controlled by Tow Rific Auto Service, including $40,000 for Eugene Nardone’s past pain and suffering and nothing for future pain and suffering. But it found that the $5,000 award to Lindsay Nardone for past loss of consortium was too low, and ordered a new trial on that issue unless the defendant agrees to increase the award to $20,000.
Vasquez v. 1719 27 ST, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In this construction injury case, a worker said he was struck by a delivery gate and sued the property-related defendants and the Petrocelli construction defendants for failing to keep the site safe. The Second Department reinstated the claims against the Petrocelli defendants because they did not show they lacked enough control over the site or notice of the gate problem, but it left the dismissal in place for the 27 ST defendants because they showed they did not control the work and had no notice of the condition. The decision matters because construction managers can still face liability if they cannot clearly prove they lacked authority over the site and knowledge of a dangerous condition.
Sabella v. Keora Realty, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department reinstated a plaintiff’s claims in a real estate lending dispute over a promissory note after the trial court dismissed the case at a damages hearing. The court held that because the defendant’s answer had already been stricken for failing to comply with discovery, liability was treated as admitted and the hearing should have focused only on the amount of damages.
Dominic Williams v. SI 1688 Realty, LLC, et al. (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In a tenant injury case involving a bathroom ceiling collapse after a leak, the Second Department held that the landlord can be held liable for ordinary negligence because it had notice of the leak and failed to fix it. But the Second Department denied liability based on res ipsa loquitur and negligence per se under the Multiple Dwelling Law, and reinstated the landlord’s comparative-negligence defenses because there were factual questions about whether the tenant knowingly entered the bathroom despite the apparent danger.
People of State of New York v. Michael Allen (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
The Second Department affirmed Michael Allen’s level-three sex offender classification under New York’s registration law, even though the trial court improperly relied on grand jury minutes and wrongly scored one factor. The court said those mistakes did not change the result, and it also held for the first time in that department that a SORA court may reopen its own hearing to fix errors as long as the person gets notice and a fair chance to respond.
Matter of Ghokassian v. Portala-Ghokassian (Appellate Division, Second Department, August 5, 2026)
In this family law dispute, the father sought sole custody and claimed the mother violated the divorce judgment by interfering with his parenting time, while the mother asked for sole legal custody and an end to court-ordered parental access. The Second Department affirmed the Family Court’s order keeping residential custody with the mother, giving her sole legal custody, ending court-ordered access for the father, and rejecting the contempt claims. This decision matters because it shows that courts will focus on the children’s best interests and the parents’ ability to cooperate, and that contempt requires clear proof of a knowing violation of a court order.