The Board of Managers of the 80th at Madison Condominium v. 1055 Madison Avenue Owners LLC (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
A condo board challenged a commercial unit owner’s façade changes, demolition that cut off access to building systems, and a large exterior sign. The First Department reinstated the board’s claims, declared the owner lacked authority and violated access rights, required board approval for signage, and barred future signs, but refused removal or reconstruction. The decision confirms boards can get declaratory relief without proving irreparable harm and that courts prefer stopping future violations over undoing costly work.
Read more: Click here
People of the State of New York v. Teon Seymore (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
This case challenged probation conditions imposed after a guilty plea to fifth-degree drug possession. The First Department struck the gang-related condition for lack of any evidence of gang ties, but otherwise affirmed the three-year probation and upheld the appeal waiver. It confirms that, even with an appeal waiver, probation terms must be reasonably tied to rehabilitation and require a factual nexus to the defendant.
Read more: Click here
People of the State of New York v. Miguel Aquirre (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
The First Department struck a probation condition requiring Miguel Aquirre to consent to warrantless searches of his person, car, and home, but otherwise affirmed his conviction and 10-year probation term. The court found no individualized basis for the broad search condition given the lack of weapons, violence, or illicit drug history and only limited alcohol issues. The ruling confirms probation terms must be tied to the record and narrowly tailored to specific risks.
Read more: Click here
People of the State of New York v. Yvonne Johnson (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
This case involved a felony aggravated DWI sentence with probation terms, including a possible ban on gang paraphernalia and associations. The First Department struck the gang condition because the record showed no link to gangs and otherwise affirmed, noting the appeal waiver barred excessive-sentence and constitutional challenges. The ruling confirms that special probation conditions must be tied to rehabilitation and supported by the record, and that defendants may still contest the legality of conditions despite an appeal waiver.
Read more: Click here
Lamia Funti v. Marcus Andrews (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
This case asked whether an unlicensed Coptic religious ceremony created a valid New York marriage. The First Department dismissed, finding no marriage because the ceremony did not meet the Church’s undisputed requirements under Domestic Relations Law § 12. The ruling confirms that without a license, only a ceremony that strictly follows the denomination’s mode counts; post-ceremony conduct cannot cure noncompliance.
Read more: Click here
People v. Iyasere (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
This appeal challenged the expiration date of a criminal order of protection issued with a robbery sentence because it didn’t account for jail-time credit. The First Department vacated the expiration date and sent the case back to recalculate it using that credit; the order stays in effect meanwhile. The ruling confirms courts must factor in jail-time credit so an order of protection doesn’t run longer than the law allows.
Read more: Click here
AMF Trust Ventures LLC et al. v. 180 Group LLC et al.; Hemingway Group LLC v. 180 Group LLC et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, January 8, 2026)
The First Department dismissed the contract claim seeking a revenue share from fees earned by a new affiliate, ruling the LLC agreement covered only fees received by the original manager. It affirmed liability under the implied covenant, finding defendants could not restructure to a new manager to strip investors of the economics they bargained for. The First Department also vacated summary judgment on mandatory redemptions, holding that whether the manager acted with “reasonable discretion” is a fact question.
Read more: Click here
The People of the State of New York v. Jose C. Rivera (Appellate Division, First Department, January 8, 2026)
This case challenged a probation condition requiring a $375 surcharge and fees from an indigent, unemployed defendant. The First Department removed the payment condition as not related to rehabilitation and otherwise affirmed the sentence. It underscores that courts cannot tie probation to payments from indigent defendants, and that a valid appeal waiver bars excessive-sentence claims.
Read more: Click here
IROHA CORPORATION d/b/a SAKE BAR HAGI v. KOOKMIN BEST INSURANCE COMPANY, formerly known as LEADING INSURANCE GROUP INSURANCE Co., LTD. (US BRANCH), et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
A restaurant sought a defense for a slip-and-fall suit, but its insurers denied coverage for late notice. The First Department reinstated the case, citing factual disputes over when notice was required, whether any delay was reasonable, and whether the insurers were actually prejudiced. The decision underscores that late-notice and prejudice issues often cannot be resolved on summary judgment.
Read more: Click here
Ismajl Mustafaj v. The City of New York et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, January 8, 2026)
A plumber was injured when coworkers dropped a 400-pound pipe into a six-foot trench at a Bronx street excavation. The First Department reinstated the § 240(1) claim against the City and granted the plaintiff summary judgment on § 240(1) against Themel Holdings and Village Cleaning, and it kept the § 241(6) claim dismissed. The decision highlights that even short drops of heavy objects can create § 240(1) liability and that municipalities may face owner liability when their ownership and permitting tie them to the work.
Read more: Click here
Valley National Bank v. Community Protestant Church of Co-Op City, Inc. (Appellate Division, First Department, January 6, 2026)
The case asked whether a court can deny an unopposed foreclosure summary judgment by raising evidence objections on its own. The First Department reinstated the bank’s summary judgment and order of reference and struck the defenses; the First Department dismissed as academic the appeal from the renewal/reargument denial. It matters because evidence objections must be raised by the nonmoving party, and a loan officer’s affidavit with loan documents is enough to establish the lender’s foreclosure case.
Read more: Click here
People of the State of New York v. Jefferson Jasmin (Appellate Division, First Department, January 8, 2026)
The First Department vacated the court-imposed surcharges and fees on Jefferson Jasmin after his guilty plea to fourth-degree drug possession. It otherwise affirmed his conviction and five-year probation. Citing People v. Chirinos and noting no opposition, the court used its interest-of-justice power to remove these costs, signaling they can be eliminated on appeal.
Read more: Click here
People v. Bonville (Appellate Division, Third Department, January 8, 2026)
This case asked whether robbery and burglary sentences after a plea should run consecutively or concurrently. The Third Department modified the judgment to concurrent terms because the written plea contemplated concurrency and the judge’s colloquy created confusion about sentencing exposure. It shows that even when consecutive terms are legally allowed, ambiguous plea discussions can lead to concurrent sentences in the interest of justice.
Read more: Click here