Case Name: Northe Group, Inc., Appellant, v. Spread NYC, LLC, Respondent, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2011-10-20
Citations: 88 A.D.3d 557
Docket Number: 
Parties: Northe Group, Inc., Appellant, v Spread NYC, LLC, Respondent, et al., Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 88
Pages: 557–558

Head Matter:
Northe Group, Inc., Appellant, v Spread NYC, LLC, Respondent, et al., Defendants.
[931 NYS2d 231]

Opinion:
In accordance with the standards for summary judgment, a claim under Lien Law § 39 is subject to summary disposition where, as here, the evidence that the amount of the lien was wilfully exaggerated is conclusive (see Strongback Corp. v N.E.D. Cambridge Ave. Dev. Corp., 25 AD3d 392, 393 [2006]). The documentary evidence, including plaintiff's invoices (which identify plaintiff as the "construction manager") and the parties' written agreement, demonstrates conclusively that plaintiff was acting under the written agreement as a construction manager (and therefore prohibited from mark ing up contractor services), not, as it argues, overseeing work under an alleged, contemporaneous oral agreement as a general contractor (with the unrestricted right to impose markups). Concur — Gonzalez, EJ., Mazzarelli, Sweeny, AbdusSalaam and Román, JJ.