Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. June O'Connor (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
In a mortgage foreclosure case, the homeowner said she was never properly served and never authorized the lawyer who appeared for her. The First Department reversed and sent the case back for a hearing on service and whether the attorney’s appearance was authorized. The ruling stresses that detailed, sworn denials can force a hearing before a foreclosure judgment stands, and a disputed attorney appearance does not waive jurisdiction.
Read more:
Click here
Andry Jose Reyes Contreras v. Ved Parkash (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
This case involves a tenant who allegedly slipped on liquid on a residential stairway. The First Department reinstated the complaint, finding the owner offered only a generic cleaning schedule and no proof of when the stairs were last cleaned or inspected. The ruling signals that to win early dismissal in New York slip-and-fall cases, owners must provide specific, time-linked cleaning or inspection evidence.
Read more:
Click here
Michael A. Martinez et al. v. Gabriel Martinez et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
A moped rider and an SUV driver gave conflicting accounts of a Manhattan crash involving a U-turn and passing around the vehicle. The First Department reversed the plaintiff’s partial summary judgment on liability and denied the motion, finding that competing narratives create factual issues for trial. This underscores that in motor vehicle cases, conflicting testimony typically defeats summary judgment.
Read more:
Click here
Chaniqua Cullins et al. v. St. Barnabas Hospital (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
Parents alleged St. Barnabas Hospital’s system failures caused a nearly six-hour delay in a stat neonatal blood transfusion, contributing to severe injuries. The First Department reinstated the direct negligence claims, finding factual disputes about blood bank coordination and nursing follow-up. The ruling signals hospitals can be directly liable for systemic delays and allows nurse experts to opine on nursing standards.
Read more:
Click here
Odell Gamble v. MTA Bus Company et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, October 21, 2025)
A passenger was injured when an MTA bus rear-ended another bus stopped at a red light. The First Department granted summary judgment on liability against MTA Bus Company, NYCTA, and the rear driver, and dismissed the defense that the passenger was at fault, but denied summary judgment as to the lead driver. The court held a certified police report with the driver’s admission is admissible under CPLR 4518(c) without a CPLR 2307 subpoena, supporting early summary judgment in rear-end cases.
Read more:
Click here
Jonathan Owen v. Eleanor Johnson (Appellate Division, First Department, October 21, 2025)
This case involved a mother’s attempt to change custody, expand or unilaterally choose a parenting coordinator, and obtain a forensic evaluation. The First Department mostly affirmed the denial of her requests and the $8,000 fee award, but required any new parenting coordinator to use the parties’ previously negotiated retainer terms. The ruling emphasizes that custody changes require a real post-order change in circumstances and that courts will enforce settlement terms, including fee-shifting.
Read more:
Click here
In the Matter of M.M., A Child Under Eighteen Years of Age, etc., Chelsea B., Respondent-Respondent, Administration for Children's Services, Petitioner-Appellant (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
The case addressed whether a child removed for alleged abuse could be returned to the mother with conditions during the neglect case. The First Department reversed and denied the § 1028 application. It held that when a parent inflicted the injuries and lacks insight, conditions and mere service enrollment do not meaningfully reduce imminent risk.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Precila Smith (also known as Precilla Aviles) (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
The case centered on whether the defendant’s waiver of indictment complied with CPL 195.20. The First Department dismissed the SCI and vacated a related guilty plea because the record lacked proof the waiver was signed in open court with counsel, the papers were undated, and there was no on-the-record colloquy. The decision underscores that strict, on-the-record compliance is mandatory, and plea deals tied to an invalid SCI are vulnerable.
Read more:
Click here
In the Matter of Reclaim The Records, et al. v. The City of New York, et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
This case involved a FOIL request for full NYC marriage record data, including records older than 50 years. The First Department held the City may withhold five sensitive fields even for 50+ year-old records unless there is a proper purpose. It also vacated attorneys’ fees, underscoring that FOIL’s privacy protections remain strong and genealogy interest alone does not compel disclosure.
Read more:
Click here
In the Matter of I.G. and Another (Appellate Division, First Department, October 21, 2025)
ACS claimed the mother neglected her children due to untreated mental health issues and a single open-hand slap used as discipline. The First Department dismissed the petitions and vacated the neglect finding, citing no proof of imminent harm and that the non-injurious slap was reasonable parental discipline. The decision underscores that neglect requires a causal link to imminent impairment and that context matters when evaluating corporal punishment.
Read more:
Click here
Ian Peck et al. v. Milbank LLP et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, October 23, 2025)
Plaintiffs sued Milbank and a partner for attorney deceit under Judiciary Law § 487, alleging they pursued note enforcement contrary to a trust and concealed conflicts. The First Department dismissed the claim, holding the attorneys advanced a reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous trust and no concrete conflict affecting professional judgment. The ruling confirms § 487 targets intentional deception in court, not advocacy over ambiguous instruments or non-litigation conduct.
Read more:
Click here
Tara Allmen v. Lawrence Kimmel (Appellate Division, First Department, October 21, 2025)
A divorcing couple disputed access to their jointly owned summer home and whether they must equally split carrying costs. The First Department reinstated enforcement of the parties’ 2019 cost-sharing stipulation and sent the case back to calculate reimbursable amounts. It otherwise affirmed no contempt, alternating weekly access, and no attorney’s fees, emphasizing that courts must enforce clear stipulations and separate routine carrying costs (taxes, insurance, utilities) from improvements.
Read more:
Click here
Michael Malekan v. Albert Malekan et al. (Appellate Division, First Department, October 21, 2025)
The First Department mostly upheld subpoenas to JPMorgan and an accountant in an LLC dispute over alleged misuse of real estate funds. It narrowed them to records from July 28, 2017 forward, limited the accountant to 1826 AMJ transactions with the four LLCs at issue, and required a confidentiality agreement. The ruling says the requests were supported by specific allegations and minimal notice, signaling courts will allow targeted nonparty financial discovery while trimming scope to protect privacy.
Read more:
Click here
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association v. Khorram (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
The case asked whether stopping an earlier foreclosure reset the six-year deadline after the loan was accelerated in 2007. The Second Department dismissed the bank’s 2015 foreclosure as untimely, holding that FAPA applies retroactively and a voluntary discontinuance does not undo acceleration. The ruling confirms a strict six-year clock for mortgage foreclosures and permits prevailing borrowers to seek attorneys’ fees under RPL § 282.
Read more:
Click here
Kacki v. 56th and Park (NY) Owner, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
The Second Department reinstated the plaintiff’s sidewalk trip-and-fall case and affirmed the denial of discovery sanctions. The owners failed to show they neither created the defect nor had notice of it, relying on affidavits and safety logs without firsthand knowledge or inspection timing. The decision underscores that owners need detailed, firsthand inspection evidence to win summary judgment, and that sanctions require willful misconduct.
Read more:
Click here
People ex rel. Bazile, on behalf of Glover v. Toulon (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 24, 2025)
A detainee sought release or reasonable bail through habeas corpus after being held pretrial in Suffolk County. The Second Department granted relief by setting bail and strict conditions—such as electronic monitoring and home confinement—and ordered release once those terms are met. The ruling confirms the court’s power in habeas to fix bail with robust nonmonetary safeguards to ensure court appearances.
Read more:
Click here
Deutsch v. Levy (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
This breach-of-contract case challenged a default judgment that exceeded what the complaint asked for. The Second Department vacated the overbroad judgment against Levy under CPLR 3215(b) and directed a new judgment capped at $20,357, while leaving intact the denial of relief under CPLR 5015(a)(1) for lack of a reasonable excuse. It underscores that default judgments cannot exceed the complaint and that a bare denial of service is not enough to reopen a default.
Read more:
Click here
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. David (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
In a foreclosure case, the bank sought to add the homeowner in her individual capacity and to amend the notice of pendency. The Second Department reinstated the amendment, allowed an amended notice of pendency retroactively, and dismissed the renewal appeal as academic. The ruling underscores liberal leave-to-amend standards, confirms a record owner/mortgagor is a proper defendant, and says courts cannot raise RPAPL 1304 on their own to block amendment absent prejudice.
Read more:
Click here
Kuhbach v. Mordas (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
This case was a fence-encroachment boundary dispute involving adverse possession and quiet title. The Second Department reversed the judgment and reinstated the complaint, denying the defendants’ summary judgment as premature and allowing renewal after discovery. The decision underscores that early summary judgment is disfavored when key facts, such as fence construction dates and whether pre-2008 adverse possession standards apply, await discovery.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of Aron Law, PLLC v. New York City Fire Department (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
A law firm sought the FDNY’s FOIL log, which the agency delayed for years and produced only after suit was filed. The Second Department reversed and awarded attorney’s fees and costs, finding the requester substantially prevailed and the agency had no reasonable, timely basis for denial. It signals that post‑litigation disclosures and unsupported claims can trigger FOIL fee‑shifting.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of Germania of Poughkeepsie, Inc. v. Town of Poughkeepsie (Appellate Division, Second Department, 2025-10-22)
This case asked whether a cultural nonprofit’s property qualified for New York’s RPTL 420-a tax exemption. The Second Department dismissed the petition and reinstated the Town’s denial, holding the property was used mostly for members-only meals and gatherings, not public charitable or educational activities, and confirming that 501(c)(3) status alone does not satisfy the primary-use requirement.
Read more:
Click here
Freedom Mortgage Corporation v. Hansen-Velazquez (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
Freedom Mortgage sought to cancel a mistakenly recorded mortgage satisfaction, but the trial court denied its unopposed default motion as moot after the mortgage was later consolidated. The Second Department reinstated the case and granted default judgment, ordering the erroneous satisfaction canceled. It also dismissed a separate appeal and confirmed that required default-judgment proofs suffice and that consolidation does not moot the claim.
Read more:
Click here
Kera & Graubard v. Abraham (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
At issue was whether a law firm could recover fees for bankruptcy work without a signed fee agreement, based on quantum meruit and account stated. The Second Department reinstated the Civil Court’s full $64,077.54 judgment because the client requested the services and kept detailed monthly bills without objection. The decision signals that clients who accept services and don’t dispute invoices can be liable even if a third party signed the retainer.
Read more:
Click here
Hall v. Nassau County (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
The Second Department reinstated homeowners’ claims that Nassau County’s property tax assessment practices shifted taxes onto predominantly nonwhite communities and transferred the case to Queens County. The court held the plaintiffs alleged enough harm to sue without detailing each property and can pursue a countywide declaratory challenge to the assessment method. The venue change matters because Nassau’s largely homeowner jury pool could have a financial stake, raising concerns about impartiality.
Read more:
Click here
Gomez v. NA Broadway Realty, LLC (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
In this sidewalk trip-and-fall case under NYC Admin Code § 7-210, the trial court had granted the plaintiff summary judgment against the owner. The Second Department reinstated the owner's defense, finding the plaintiff didn’t show the owner created the defect or knew or should have known about it; digital maps and other pleadings were not enough. The ruling confirms § 7-210 is not strict liability and requires specific proof of notice, and The Second Department dismissed the property manager’s appeal as not aggrieved.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Lewis (Appellate Division, Second Department, Decision on reargument; prior August 10, 2022 decision recalled and vacated (exact date not specified))
The Second Department held that police went beyond a lawful frisk by reaching into the defendant’s pocket and searching his wallet without any reason to think it was a weapon. It suppressed the wallet and its contents, vacated the robbery-related convictions, and ordered a new trial on those counts, while affirming the flight-related offenses. The ruling reinforces that frisks are limited to finding weapons and that unlawfully obtained evidence cannot prop up identity-based charges.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of Goldenstein v. New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
This case challenged NYC’s COVID-19 mask rule for children in childcare, which a trial court had struck down. The Second Department dismissed the appeals as academic after the rule was rescinded and vacated the trial court’s orders. The court emphasized that judges must review only the agency record and ask whether the rule had a reasonable basis, and that wiping out the trial ruling prevents unintended precedent.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Razeah S. Flanigan (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
After a flare-gun incident that burned the victim, a jury acquitted on the indicted charges but convicted Razeah Flanigan of second-degree assault and second-degree reckless endangerment. The Third Department upheld the assault conviction, finding the proof showed serious physical injury and that any error in the lesser-included instructions was harmless. The Third Department dismissed the reckless endangerment conviction as a lesser included offense of the assault count, underscoring that a defendant cannot be convicted of both a greater offense and its lesser.
Read more:
Click here
Stone Cast, Inc. v. Couch, Dale Marshall P.C., et al. (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
The case asked whether a payment bond limited to “labor, materials and equipment” required the surety to pay prejudgment interest, and whether the client’s lawyers caused the loss of that interest. The Third Department dismissed the malpractice case, holding the bond excluded prejudgment interest and a surety’s liability cannot exceed its bond. This matters because such bonds do not cover prejudgment interest absent express language, so malpractice claims cannot rest on recovering interest the surety never owed.
Read more:
Click here
Felipe v. State of New York (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
After a five-car pileup involving a State-owned SUV, a driver sought permission to file a late negligence claim against the State. The Third Department reinstated the claim, finding the rear-end chain reaction supports negligence and medical imaging shows a plausible serious injury. It emphasized that a weak excuse for delay does not bar a late claim when the State had timely notice and cannot show prejudice.
Read more:
Click here
The People of the State of New York v. Nicholas X. Smith (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
A defendant convicted of two murders, attempted first-degree robbery, and weapon possession challenged the jury instructions and other trial rulings. The Third Department reversed the attempted robbery conviction and vacated that sentence, sending it back for a new trial, but affirmed the murder and weapon convictions. It held the jury charge wrongly mixed two different robbery theories, likely confusing jurors, underscoring that courts must accurately track the charged statute and define “forcible stealing.”
Read more:
Click here
Anthony Johns v. Crown Equipment Corporation (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
This case involves a stand-up forklift injury where the plaintiff alleged a design defect and sought future medical costs. The Third Department reinstated the case and ordered a new trial, finding the trial court improperly allowed broad, non-comparable injury statistics and wrongly limited the plaintiff’s medical and economic evidence. The decision emphasizes that accident data must closely match the product and conditions, and competent physician testimony can support future medical expense estimates.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Roy K. Nestler (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
This case asked whether a court could increase a negotiated sentence because the defendant failed to pay restitution before sentencing. The Third Department vacated the 4-to-12-year enhancement and ordered the agreed 2-to-6-year term, with restitution as previously set. It matters because courts may not exceed a plea bargain unless an explicit, warned-of condition is violated; nonpayment alone isn’t enough without clear agreement.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Brenda WW. (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
This case concerns resentencing under the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act and whether extra time served can reduce postrelease supervision (PRS). The Third Department reduced the prison terms to eight years and imposed three years of PRS, with no credit for overserved time. The decision confirms that excess incarceration cannot offset mandatory PRS and that courts may set PRS within the statutory range.
Read more:
Click here
Matter of George F. West v. Chris Alexander, as Acting Executive Director of Cannabis Management (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
The Third Department dismissed OCM’s July 2023 unlicensed-sale and warning-sticker charges for lack of a served notice of violation, but upheld a June 2023 unlicensed-sale finding based on a lawful regulatory inspection. The court refused to remit to cure the notice defect. The decision confirms OCM must give timely notice for each charge, affirms broad inspection authority and limited discovery, and permits reliance on THC labeling without lab tests.
Read more:
Click here
People of the State of New York v. Gordon M. Mower Jr. (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
Case: The defendant claimed his 1996 guilty plea was influenced by his lawyer’s misadvice about likely sentence reductions and a $10,000 payment from a relative. The Third Department reinstated his CPL 440 motion and ordered an evidentiary hearing, excusing discretionary procedural bars and the missing trial‑counsel affirmation. The decision underscores that credible, nonrecord claims can warrant a hearing even when the plea colloquy states the plea was voluntary.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Dorain G. Bohn (Appellate Division, Third Department, October 23, 2025)
The Third Department reversed a babysitter’s convictions for depraved indifference murder, first-degree manslaughter, and child endangerment, and ordered a new trial. The court found cumulative prejudicial errors: prior bad acts, sexual-assault insinuations despite no charge, an unvalidated breath test, and expert/coroner opinions labeling the death a “homicide.” Although the evidence was legally sufficient, these errors were not harmless, reinforcing strict limits on such proof in child homicide cases.
Read more:
Click here
People v. Hanlon, Jeff T. (Appellate Division, Second Department, October 22, 2025)
The case challenged the validity of a guilty plea, the appeal waiver, and the sentence. The Second Department affirmed: the plea claim wasn’t raised in County Court, the record showed a knowing and voluntary plea, and a valid appeal waiver barred sentence review. It underscores that defendants must object in the trial court to attack a plea on appeal and that even a brief, clear appeal‑waiver explanation can foreclose excessive‑sentence claims.
Read more:
Click here