Court Opinion

ID: 9916546
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-10 01:09:43.219377+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:33.749532
License: Public Domain

Goldstein, Rikon, Rikon & Levi, P.C. v 35 Delevan
                     Owners LLC
               2023 NY Slip Op 34583(U)
                   December 18, 2023
             Supreme Court, Kings County
        Docket Number: Index No. 513884/2022
                  Judge: Ingrid Joseph
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
 Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
 State and local government sources, including the New
   York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
 This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
                       publication.
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                                       INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

                                                                                   At
                                                                                   At an IAS
                                                                                         lAS Part
                                                                                              Part 83 of
                                                                                                      of the
                                                                                                         the Supreme
                                                                                                             Supreme Court
                                                                                                                       Court of
                                                                                                                             of the
                                                                                   State
                                                                                   State of New York
                                                                                         of New  York held
                                                                                                       held in and
                                                                                                               and for the County
                                                                                                                           County
                                                                                   of Kings
                                                                                   of Kings at 360
                                                                                               360 Adams
                                                                                                    Adams Street,
                                                                                                            Street, Bro~ew
                                                                                                                    Brooklyn, New
                                                                                   York,                        _pQ~
                                                                                          on the ~ d a y of ~023.
                                                                                   York,onthe~dayof                            023.
           PRESENT:
           PRESENT: HON.            INGRID JOSEPH,
                           HON.INGRID            JOSEPH, J.S.C.
                                                              J.S.C.
           SUPREME
           SUPREME COURT   COURT OF THE     THE STATE
                                                    STATE OF
           NEW YORK
           NEW     YORK COUNTYCOUNTY OF KINGS     KINGS
           ----------------------------------------------------------------------X                      Index
                                                                                                        Index No: 513884/2022
                                                                                                                  51388412022
           ----------------------------------------------------------------------)(
           GOLDSTEIN,
           GOLDSTEIN, RIKON,   RIKON, RIKON RIKON & LEVI,  LEVI, P.C.,
                                                                    P.C.,
                                                                  Plaintiff(s)
                                                                  Plaintiff(s)
                                     -against-
                                     -against-
                                                                                                             ORDER
                                                                                                             ORDER
           35 DELEVAN
               DELEVAN OWNERS   OWNERS LLC     LLC and HARBOR
                                                            HARBOR TECH   TECH LLC, LLC,
           And NEW
                 NEW YORK YORK CITY CITY SCHOOL
                                             SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION
                                                           CONSTRUCTION
           AUTHORITY,
           AUTHORITY,
                                                                  Defendant(
                                                                  Defendant(s)s)
           ----------------------------------------------------------------------X
           ----------------------------------------------------------------------)(
                                                                                                                     NYSCEFNos.:
                                                                                                                     NYSCEF Nos.:
           The
           The following
                following e-filed
                          e-filed papers
                                  papers read
                                         read herein:
                                                herein:
           Notice of
           Notice  of Motion/ Affirmation in Support/
                      Motion/Affirmation       Support! Affidavits
                                                        Affidavits Annexed·
                                                                   Annexed
           Exhibits  Annexed/Reply .......... .
           Exhibits Annexed/Reply                                                                                    10-21; 33
                                                                                                                     10-21;
           Affirmation
           Affirmation in Opposition/Affidavits
                           Opposition/Affidavits Annexed/Exhibits
                                                    Annexed/Exhibits Annexed
                                                                      Annexed ........... .                          22-31

                     In this
                        this matter, New York
                             matter, New York City
                                              City School
                                                   School Construction
                                                          Construction Authority
                                                                       Authority ("SCA"
                                                                                 ("SCA" or "Defendant")
                                                                                           "Defendant") moves
                                                                                                        moves
           (Motion
           (Motion Seq. 1) for an order
                                  order pursuant
                                        pursuant to CPLR SS 321 Ha)(l)
                                                    CPLR §§     1(a)(l) and
                                                                        and (a)(7)
                                                                            (a)(7) dismissing
                                                                                   dismissing Goldstein,
                                                                                              Goldstein, Rikon,
                                                                                                         Rikon,                       ·,"
           Rikon, & Levi,
           Rikon,   Levi, P.C.
                          P.C.'s's ("Goldstein"
                                   ("Goldstein" or
                                                or "Plaintiff')
                                                   "Plaintiff') Verified
                                                                Verified Complaint
                                                                         Complaint with
                                                                                   with prejudice
                                                                                        prejudice on the
                                                                                                     the ground
                                                                                                         ground that
                                                                                                                that
           Plaintiff
           Plaintiff has
                     has failed
                         failed to state
                                   state a viable
                                           viable cause
                                                  cause of
                                                        of action
                                                           action against
                                                                  against SCA.
                                                                          SCA. Plaintiff
                                                                               Plaintiff has
                                                                                         has opposed
                                                                                             opposed the
                                                                                                     the motion.
                                                                                                         motion.
                     Plaintiff
                     Plaintiff commenced
                               commenced this
                                         this action
                                              action on May
                                                        May 12, 2022, to recover
                                                            12,2022,     recover legal
                                                                                 legal fees purportedly owed
                                                                                       fees purportedly owed for
            legal
            legal services
                  services it rendered
                              rendered to former
                                          former clients,
                                                 clients, Defendants
                                                          Defendants 35 Delevan
                                                                        Delevan Owners
                                                                                Owners LLC
                                                                                       LLC ("35
                                                                                           ("35 Delevan")
                                                                                                Delevan") and
           Harbor
           Harbor Tech
                  Tech LLC
                       LLC ("Harbor").
                           ("Harbor"). In its Verified
                                              Verified Complaint,
                                                       Complaint, Plaintiff
                                                                  Plaintiff alleges
                                                                            alleges that
                                                                                    that Defendants
                                                                                         Defendants 35 Delevan
                                                                                                       Delevan and
           Harbor
           Harbor retained
                  retained Plaintiff's
                           Plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest,
                                       predecessor-in-interest, Goldstein,
                                                                Goldstein, Rikon, Rikon, & Houghton,
                                                                           Rikon, Rikon,   Houghton, P.C.
                                                                                                     P.e. to obtain
                                                                                                             obtain
           just compensation
           just compensation for Defendants
                                 Defendants 35 Delevan
                                               Delevan and Harbor
                                                           Harbor in connection
                                                                     connection with
                                                                                with SCA's
                                                                                     SCA's acquisition
                                                                                           acquisition of
                                                                                                       of and/or
                                                                                                          and/or
               condemnation of
           the condemnation of two
                               two properties
                                   properties located
                                              located at 21-3
                                                         21-31I and 35 Delevan
                                                                       Delevan St. Brooklyn, New York
                                                                                   Brooklyn, New York 11231 (the
                                                                                                            (the
           "Subject
           "Subject Premises").
                    Premises"). Plaintiff
                                Plaintiff contends
                                          contends that
                                                   that the retainer
                                                            retainer agreement
                                                                     agreement between
                                                                               between 35 Delevan,
                                                                                          Delevan, Harbor,
                                                                                                   Harbor, and
           Plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest and
           Plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest and its charging
                                                       charging lien now
                                                                     now entitles
                                                                         entitles Plaintiff
                                                                                  Plaintiff to a contingency
                                                                                                 contingency fee based
                                                                                                                 based on .
           a percentage
             percentage of
                        of all amounts
                               amounts received
                                       received from SCA,
                                                     SCA, "whether
                                                          "whether by award,
                                                                      award, suit,
                                                                             suit, purchase,
                                                                                   purchase, settlement,
                                                                                             settlement,
           supplemental
           supplemental advance
                        advance payment,
                                payment, or otherwise
                                            otherwise including
                                                      including interest."
                                                                interest." Plaintiff
                                                                           Plaintiff asserts
                                                                                     asserts causes
                                                                                             causes of
                                                                                                    of action
                                                                                                       action for
           breach
           breach of
                  of contract,
                     contract, breach
                               breach of
                                      of duty
                                         duty of
                                              of good
                                                 good faith and fair dealing,
                                                                     dealing, entitlement
                                                                              entitlement to
                                                                                          to an attorney's
                                                                                                attorney's lien on
           proceeds
           proceeds of
                    of settlement pursuant to Judiciary
                       settlement pursuant    Judiciary Law
                                                        Law 475 and for a constructive
                                                                          constructive bailment
                                                                                       bailment as to SCA.
                                                                                                      SCA.
                     In its Verified
                            Verified Complaint,
                                     Complaint, Plaintiff  alleges that
                                                Plaintiffalleges   that it was
                                                                           was retained
                                                                               retained by Defendants    Delevan and.
                                                                                           Defendants 35 Delevan and
           Harbor
           Harbor on October
                     October 16, 2018,
                                 2018, as evidenced
                                          evidenced by the parties'
                                                           parties' Engagement
                                                                    Engagement Letter
                                                                               Letter and
                                                                                      and Retainer
                                                                                          Retainer Agreement.
                                                                                                   Agreement.
           The
           The Verified
               Verified Complaint
                        Complaint states
                                  states that
                                         that SCA
                                              SCA made
                                                  made a pre-vesting
                                                         pre-vesting offer
                                                                     offer to purchase
                                                                              purchase the
                                                                                       the Subject
                                                                                           Subject Premises
                                                                                                   Premises for ·

                                                                              11

                                                                                                                                                /
                                                                         1 of 10
[* 1]                   "-   - ..   -   -   -------------_._----------                                                                      f
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                            INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                               RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

           $18,300,000.00, which
           $18,300,000.00, which was
                                 was rejected
                                     rejected by
                                              by Plaintiff
                                                 Plaintiff on behalf of its former
                                                              behalf of     former clients via letter
                                                                                   clients via              February
                                                                                                      dated February
                                                                                               letter dated
           28,2019.
           28, 2019. On
                     On December
                        December 8, 2020,
                                    2020, Plaintiffs predecessor-in-interest and 35 Delevan
                                          Plaintiffs predecessor-in-interest                signed an
                                                                                    Delevan signed
           acknowledgement letter
           acknowledgement letter wherein
                                  wherein it states
                                             states that                    LLC is changing
                                                                     Owners LLC
                                                             Delevan Owners
                                                    that "35 Delevan               changing its name    21 and 35
                                                                                                name to 21
           Delevan
           Delevan LLC,
                   LLC, that
                        that this
                             this is a change
                                       change in name
                                                 name only,     ownership, that
                                                      only, not ownership,         and 35 Delevan
                                                                           that 21 and                Hereby
                                                                                                  LLC Hereby
                                                                                          Delevan LLC
           Agrees
           Agrees to Retain Goldstein, Rikon,
                     Retain Goldstein,        Rikon & Houghton,
                                       Rikon, Rikon                              bound by the
                                                                    agrees to be bound
                                                      Houghton, and agrees                    Retainer
                                                                                          the Retainer
           Agreement
           Agreement signed
                     signed by 35 Delevan
                                  Delevan Owners
                                          Owners LLC    October 16,2018
                                                 LLC on October             consents and
                                                                16,2018 and consents                   Terms
                                                                                         agrees to all Terms
                                                                                     and agrees
               Conditions therein."
           and Conditions                        Plaintiff alleges
                                    Furthermore, Plaintiff
                          therein." Furthermore,           alleges that             ongoing efforts,
                                                                        through its ongoing
                                                                   that through             efforts, SCA increased its
                                                                                                     SCA increased
           purchase
           purchase offer
                    offer to $32,000,000.00,
                             $32,000,000.00, which
                                             which Plaintiff accepted on behalf
                                                   Plaintiff accepted                  former clients
                                                                                of its former
                                                                         behalf of                             of
                                                                                                         March of
                                                                                              clients in March
           2022. However,
           2022. However, on April 8,2022,35
                             April 8, 2022, 35 Delevan            terminated Plaintiffs
                                                           Harbor terminated
                                               Delevan and Harbor                       representation and
                                                                             Plaintiffs representation
           requested
           requested that
                     that their
                          their files be transferred             Carter Ledyard
                                         transferred to the firm Carter                   LLP. On
                                                                                  Milburn LLP.
                                                                        Ledyard & Milburn               8, 2022,
                                                                                                  April 8,2022,
                                                                                               On April
           Plaintiff
           Plaintiff states
                     states that
                            that it informed
                                    informed counsel
                                             counsel at the
                                                        the newly appo,inted firm that
                                                            newly appojnted               files would
                                                                                  that no files          transferred until
                                                                                                      be transferred
                                                                                                would be
           Plaintiffs
           Plaintiffs attorney's                       April 11,
                                         satisfied. On April
                      attorney's lien is satisfied.          11,2022,            sent counsel
                                                                       Plaintiff sent
                                                                 2022, Plaintiff              and SCA
                                                                                      counsel and            of a
                                                                                                        copy of
                                                                                                  SCA a copy
           Notice
           Notice of
                  of Lien
                     Lien and
                          and an Amended
                                 Amended Notice
                                         Notice of
                                                of Lien
                                                   Lien and informed counsel that
                                                            informed counsel      the lien
                                                                             that the      would be released
                                                                                      lien would             upon
                                                                                                    released upon
           payment of$l,
           payment of     844, 149
                      $1, 844, 149.27
                                   .27 for legal          expenses. The
                                                      and expenses.
                                           legal fees and               Verified Complaint
                                                                    The Verified           also states
                                                                                 Complaint also states that    April
                                                                                                       that on April
           21,2022,
           21, 2022, Plaintiff
                     Plaintiff sent
                               sent a copy
                                      copy of
                                           of the Amended Notice of
                                                  Amended Notice    Lien to Lex
                                                                 of Lien        Terrae Ltd.,
                                                                            Lex Terrae       which upon
                                                                                       Ltd., which      information
                                                                                                   upon information
           and belief
               belief is the
                         the title company that
                             title company               hired by SCA
                                           that has been hired    SCA to handle     transfer of
                                                                                the transfer
                                                                         handle the             the Subject
                                                                                             of the         Premises
                                                                                                    Subject Premises
           from 35 Delevan
                   Delevan and Harbor
                               Harbor to SCA.
                                         SCA. On May 17,
                                              On May 17,2022,             Delevan LLC"
                                                         2022, "21 and 35 Delevan      and "SCA:
                                                                                  LLC" and       entered
                                                                                           "SCA: entered
           into a Purchase          Agreement for the Subject
                  Purchase and Sale Agreement         Subject Premises.        26, 2022,
                                                                           May 26,
                                                              Premises. On May             Closing Settlement
                                                                                   2022, a Closing Settlement
           Statement was
           Statement     signed by the
                     was signed    the parties
                                       parties and issued
                                                   issued by Old Republic National Commercial
                                                                 Republic National            Title Services.
                                                                                   Commercial Title Services.
                   In support
                      support of
                              of its motion,
                                     motion, SCA        that Plaintiff
                                                 argues that
                                             SCA argues                    failed to assert
                                                             Plaintiff has failed             viable cause
                                                                                     assert a viable          action for
                                                                                                           of action
                                                                                                     cause of
           a constructive
             constructive bailment
                          bailment or for entitlement
                                   or for                  charging lien because
                                          entitlement to a charging                        never had
                                                                                 Plaintiff never
                                                                         because Plaintiff               right or
                                                                                                     any right
                                                                                                 had any
           interest
           interest in SCA's
                       SCA's money
                             money either
                                   either before
                                          before or after
                                                    after it purchased              fr~m 35 Delevan
                                                                           property from
                                                             purchased the property                     Harbor.
                                                                                                    and Harbor.
                                                                                            Delevan and
           SCA states
               states that
                      that 35 Delevan
                              Delevan and Harbor,
                                          Harbor, who
                                                  who were     former owners
                                                           the former
                                                      were the        owners of the Subject
                                                                             of the Subject Premises, tenninated
                                                                                            Premises, terminated
           Plaintiff
           Plaintiff for cause
                         cause on April
                                  April 8, 2022,
                                           2022, after
                                                 after learning
                                                       learning that           was simultaneously
                                                                     Plaintiff was
                                                                that Plaintiff                                   tenant
                                                                                                  representing a tenant
                                                                                   simultaneously representing
           of 35 Delevan
           of    Delevan and Harbor
                             Harbor in relation
                                       relation to the property, and that
                                                   the property,               while new
                                                                          that while
                                                                     that that           counsel was
                                                                                     new counsel            process
                                                                                                        the process
                                                                                                 was in the
           of
           of negotiating
              negotiating the
                          the terms
                              terms of
                                    of a potential
                                         potential sale,
                                                   sale, Plaintiff initiated this
                                                         Plaintiff initiated      action. With
                                                                             this action.      respect to Plaintiffs
                                                                                          With respect                claim
                                                                                                          Plaintiff's claim
               entitlement to a charging
           for entitlement      charging lien, SCA argues that
                                               SCA argues         automatic lien arose
                                                          that no automatic            under Judiciary
                                                                                 arose under           Law S 475
                                                                                             Judiciary Law§
           because
           because there
                   there can
                         can be no liability
                                   liability to a third-party
                                                  third-party under the statute
                                                              under the statute without the commencement
                                                                                without the                    action
                                                                                                         of an action
                                                                                            commencement of
           or proceeding
              proceeding by an attorney
                               attorney at the
                                           the time the attorney's
                                               time the            services were
                                                        attorney's services were rendered          invoke the
                                                                                 rendered so as to invoke
           jurisdiction
           jurisdiction of
                        of the
                           the court
                               court over
                                     over a third-party. SCA asserts
                                            third-party. SCA asserts that Plaintiff "merely
                                                                     that Plaintiff "merely responded      pre-vesting
                                                                                            responded to a pre-vesting
           offer
           offer made
                 made by SCA,"
                         SCA," which    rejected on February
                               which it rejected                 2019.
                                                    February 28, 2019.
                   Additionally, SCA claims
                   Additionally, SCA claims that
                                            that the
                                                 the 2012 amendment of
                                                     2012 amendment of Judiciary Law§S 475 was
                                                                       Judiciary Law       was not intended to
                                                                                               not intended
           allow
           allow an attorney
                    attorney who
                             who provided
                                 provided pre-litigation
                                          pre-litigation services           the requirements
                                                                     bypass the
                                                         services to bypass                              serve a
                                                                                                formally serve
                                                                                requirements to formally
           Notice of Lien
           Notice of Lien on a third-party
                               third-party so that
                                              that a court may acquire
                                                     court may         jurisdiction over
                                                               acquire jurisdiction      the third
                                                                                    over the             pursuant to
                                                                                                   party pursuant
                                                                                             third party

                                                                   2

                                                              2 of 10
[* 2]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                               INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                                 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

          companion statute
          companion statute Judiciary Law§S 475-a.
                            Judiciary Law                    SCA states
                                                   Moreover, SCA
                                            475-a. Moreover,            that Plaintiffs
                                                                 states that            lien notices
                                                                             Plaintiffs lien         are defective
                                                                                             notices are defective
           pursuant to Judiciary
           pursuant              Law S 475-a
                       Judiciary Law§  475-a because (l) they
                                             because (l)      were sent
                                                         they were         regular mail,
                                                                   sent by regular       (2) they
                                                                                   mail, (2)                state any
                                                                                                  failed to state
                                                                                             they failed
          established attorney-client
          established                 relationship, and (3)
                      attorney-client relationship,         they were
                                                        (3) they      not signed
                                                                 were not signed by Plaintiff's clients
                                                                                 by Plaintiffs              witnessed
                                                                                                        nor witnessed
                                                                                                clients nor
                              person.
                disinterested person.
           by a disinterested
                   With
                   With respect
                        respect to Plaintiffs  constructive bailment
                                   Plaintiff's constructive                 SCA argues
                                                                     claim, SCA
                                                            bailment claim,     argues that Plaintiff has failed
                                                                                       that Plaintiff     failed to
           assert any
           assert any facts,        if true,
                             which, if
                      facts, which,          would have
                                       true, would      created a constructive
                                                   have created                bailment or made
                                                                  constructive bailment             SCA its
                                                                                                the SCA
                                                                                           made the
           constructive bailee.
           constructive bailee. SCA         that that
                                    asserts that
                                SCA asserts      that the money over
                                                      the money      which Plaintiff
                                                                over which           claims a constructive
                                                                           Plaintiff claims                bailment
                                                                                              constructive bailment
           was the SCA's
           was     SCA's own
                         own property
                             property and was used
                                      and was      after the lawsuit
                                              used after             was filed to purchase
                                                             lawsuit was                       Property from 35
                                                                                           the Property
                                                                                  purchase the
           Delevan and Harbor.
           Delevan       Harbor. SCA
                                  SCA argues
                                        argues that     the extent
                                                that to the          that Plaintiff
                                                             extent that            claims a right
                                                                          Plaintiff claims              portion of
                                                                                             right to a portion    the money
                                                                                                                of the money
           paid for the sale,
           paid         sale, under
                              under the plain terms of
                                        plain terms          retainer agreement
                                                      of its retainer  agreement with       Delevan and
                                                                                    with 35 Delevan   and Harbor,       right
                                                                                                                   that right
                                                                                                          Harbor, that
           can only
           can only have
                    have arisen
                         arisen after
                                after the closing once
                                      the closing          money was
                                                  once the money     paid to the
                                                                 was paid           Delevan and
                                                                             the 35 Delevan     Harbor. SCA
                                                                                            and Harbor. SCA
           claims that
           claims  that it never
                           never held       money claimed
                                        any money
                                 held any                     Plaintiff and that
                                                  claimed by Plaintiff           the Purchase
                                                                            that the             and Sale
                                                                                      Purchase and        Agreement
                                                                                                     Sale Agreement
           establishes that
           establishes  that the
                             the title company apportioned
                                 title company              any amounts
                                                apportioned any           owed to third-parties
                                                                amounts owed                           of the purchase.
                                                                                                   out of
                                                                                     third-parties out        purchase.
           SCA states
           SCA states the
                      the lien notices are also
                               notices are                      create a constructive
                                                insufficient to create
                                           also insufficient             constructive bailment         Plaintiffs
                                                                                               because Plaintiffs
                                                                                      bailment because
           interest in the
           interest    the funds
                           funds did not
                                     not vest until the
                                         vest until     funds were
                                                    the funds      paid to the
                                                              were paid           Delevan and
                                                                           the 35 Delevan     Harbor, therefore,
                                                                                          and Harbor, therefore,
           Plaintiff could
           Plaintiff could not
                           not have
                               have had
                                     had any           the purchase
                                          any lien on the           price or SCA's
                                                           purchase price    SCA's money         after it left SCA's
                                                                                           until after
                                                                                   money until                 SCA's
           hands. SCA
           hands.   SCA submits
                         submits affidavits
                                 affidavits of         Neumann ("Neumann"),
                                                Elliot Neumann
                                            of Elliot                                         signatory for 35 Delevan
                                                                                  authorized signatory
                                                                 ("Neumann"), an authorized                      Delevan
           and Harbor
               Harbor and Edward
                          Edward Perez
                                 Perez ("Perez"), senior attorney
                                       ("Perez"), senior             SCA, wherein
                                                                  of SCA,
                                                         attorney of              parties merely
                                                                          wherein parties              that copies
                                                                                                 state that
                                                                                          merely state      copies
           of submitted
           of                         annexed as exhibits.
                        documents are annexed
              submitted documents                exhibits.
                    In opposition,
                       opposition, Plaintiff
                                   Plaintiff argues
                                             argues that        asserted viable
                                                    that it has asserted               of actions
                                                                                causes of
                                                                         viable causes                    SCA did hold a
                                                                                                  because SCA
                                                                                          actions because
                of money,
           fund of money, which constituted as Plaintiffs
                          which constituted    Plaintiff's property,     had a charging
                                                           property, and had            lien on it, and
                                                                               charging lien        and that because
                                                                                                        that because
           SCA wrongfully
           SCA wrongfully disposed
                          disposed of     entire fund
                                      the entire
                                   of the             without paying
                                                 fund without        Plaintiff or
                                                              paying Plaintiff              money to cover
                                                                                  reserving money
                                                                               or reserving          cover
           Plaintiffs  liens, it violated
           Plaintiff's liens,    violated its obligations    bailee of
                                              obligations as bailee of the       Plaintiff states
                                                                       the fund. Plaintiff states that under Judiciary
                                                                                                  that under           Law§S
                                                                                                             Judiciary Law
               charging liens
           475 charging  liens arise
                               arise either
                                     either when            appears in a proceeding
                                                    lawyer appears
                                            when a lawyer                                       lawyer begins
                                                                                         when a lawyer
                                                                         proceeding or when              begins
           negotiating   settlement of
           negotiating a settlement              Plaintiff contends
                                        dispute. Plaintiff
                                     of dispute.           contends that               charging lien
                                                                            obtained a charging
                                                                    that it obtained            lien not  only by
                                                                                                     not only
           appearing on behalf
           appearing    behalf of
                               of 3
                                  35  Delevan and Harbor
                                    5 Delevan                      condemnation proceeding,
                                                            SCA' s condemnation
                                                  Harbor in SCA'                                also by
                                                                                            but also
                                                                                proceeding, but
           negotiating     dispute between
           negotiating the dispute             former clients
                                   between its former                  wherein SCA
                                                                  SCA, wherein
                                                      clients and SCA,         SCA purchased     Subject Premises
                                                                                             the Subject
                                                                                   purchased the         Premises
           in lieu of
                   of condemnation.
                      condemnation. Plaintiff        that SCA
                                              claims that
                                    Plaintiff claims                    condemnation proceeding
                                                              began the condemnation
                                                          SCA began                             pursuant to
                                                                                     proceeding pursuant
           Article 2 of
           Article   of the
                        the Eminent
                            Eminent Domain
                                      Domain Procedure          July of
                                                         Law in July
                                               Procedure Law            2021, by issuing
                                                                     of202l,               Notice of
                                                                                 issuing a Notice        Public Hearing
                                                                                                    ofaa Public Hearing
           which, Plaintiff
           which,  Plaintiff received and attended
                             received and              August 14, 2019.
                                          attended on August                           Plaintiff claims
                                                                         Furthermore, Plaintiff
                                                                  2019. Furthermore,                     that SCA
                                                                                                 claims that      issued
                                                                                                              SCA issued
             Determination of
           a Determination  of Findings    November of
                               Findings in November      20 19, wherein
                                                      of 2019,          SCA made
                                                                wherein SCA         the initial
                                                                              made the                       exercise its
                                                                                                decision to exercise
                                                                                        initial decision
           condemnation power
           condemnation          over the
                          power over  the property. However, SCA
                                          property. However,        ultimately increased
                                                              SCA ultimately                            offer to
                                                                                              purchase offer
                                                                               increased its purchase
           $32,000,000.00, which
           $32,000,000.00,  which Plaintiff
                                  Plaintiff accepted     behalf of
                                            accepted on behalf                 clients before
                                                                        former clients
                                                                 of its former                       terminated. Plaintiff
                                                                                               being terminated.
                                                                                       before being               Plaintiff
           maintains that payment
           maintains that         of the
                          payment of the purchase   price of
                                          purchase price  of the property through
                                                             the property                   company did
                                                                                      title company
                                                                           through a title               not extinguish
                                                                                                     did not extinguish

                                                                    3

                                                                3 of 10
[* 3]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                            INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                              RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

                        that SCA'
           its lien and that        argument that
                             SCA'ss argument                            defective is immaterial
                                                                   were defective
                                                           notices were
                                             that its lien notices                   immaterial because Plaintiff is not
                                                                                                because Plaintiff    not
           moving
           moving under
                  under Judiciary Law§S 475-a
                        Judiciary Law             under Judiciary
                                              but under
                                        475-a but                 Law§S 475,
                                                        Judiciary Law        which does
                                                                        475, which      not require
                                                                                   does not         notice. Thus,
                                                                                            require notice. Thus,
           Plaintiff
           Plaintiff claims
                     claims it has
                               has established entitlement to a charging
                                   established entitlement                                    any fund
                                                                                     favor in any
                                                                charging lien in its favor             created for its
                                                                                                  fund created
           former client,
           former client, which
                          which attached
                                attached the moment the
                                         the moment     settlement was
                                                    the settlement     agreed upon.
                                                                   was agreed            respect to Plaintiffs
                                                                                    With respect
                                                                              upon. With            Plaintiffs
           claim for a constructive
           claim                              Plaintiff argues
                                    bailment, Plaintiff
                       constructive bailment,           argues that because SCA
                                                               that because        holding $1,844,149.28
                                                                            SCA is holding               under
                                                                                           $1,844,149.28 under
           circumstances
           circumstances where
                         where the
                               the law imposes a duty
                                   law imposes        upon SCA
                                                 duty upon SCA to deliver       Plaintiff, that
                                                                  deliver it to Plaintiff,                      viable
                                                                                                Plaintiff has a viable
                                                                                           that Plaintiff
           cause of
           cause           against SCA.
                    action against
                 of action         SCA
                   Upon   motion to dismiss
                   Upon a motion    dismiss pursuant         S 3211 (a)(l),
                                                        CPLR §
                                            pursuant to CPLR                                       where
                                                                                         warranted where
                                                                            dismissal is warranted
                                                                    (a)(l), dismissal
           documentary evidence refutes
           documentary evidence refutes plaintiffs factual allegations
                                        plaintiffs factual                 establishes a defense
                                                                       and establishes
                                                           allegations and                                   of law
                                                                                                      matter of
                                                                                         defense as a matter
           (Leon at 88; Goshum
           (Leon        Goshum v Mutual               ofNew
                                        Life Ins. Co. of
                                 Mutual Life                               314 [2002];
                                                                      NY2d 314
                                                         New York, 98 NY2d     [2002]; Brio             A.D.3d
                                                                                              Roth, 121 AD.3d
                                                                                       Brio v Roth,
                   Dept. 2014]).To
           733 [2d Dept.            constitute documentary
                         20 14]).To constitute                       the evidence
                                                           evidence, the
                                               documentary evidence,              must be "unambiguous,
                                                                         evidence must    "unambiguous,
           authentic, and undeniable,"
           authentic,     undeniable," such             records and documents
                                               judicial records
                                       such as judicial                       reflecting out-of-court
                                                                    documents reflecting              transactions
                                                                                         out-of-court transactions
           such as mortgages,
           such    mortgages, deeds,
                              deeds, contracts, and any
                                     contracts, and     other papers,
                                                    any other         the contents
                                                              papers, the          of which
                                                                          contents of           essentially
                                                                                            are essentially
                                                                                      which are
           undeniable ((Granada
           undeniable   Granada Condominium     Assn. v.
                                            III Assn.
                                Condominium III          Palomino, 78 A.D.3d
                                                      v. Palomino,                   Dept. 201
                                                                             996 [2d Dept.
                                                                      AD.3d 996            2010];  Prott v.
                                                                                               0]; Prott    Lewin
                                                                                                         v. Lewin
           & Baglio,
             Bag/io, LLP, ISO AD3d
                     LLP, 150 AD3d 908     Dept 2017]).
                                   908 [2d Dept            affidavit is not
                                                2017]). An affidavit        documentary evidence
                                                                        not documentary          because its
                                                                                        evidence because
           contents
           contents can be controverted
                           controverted by other           such as another
                                                 evidence, such
                                           other evidence,                           (Xu v Van Zqienen,
                                                                           affidavit (Xu
                                                                   another affidavit                        A.D.3d
                                                                                               Zqienen, 212 AD.3d
                   Dept. 2023];
           872 [2d Dept. 2023]; Phillips        Bell Corp., 152 A.D.3d
                                Phillips v Taco Bell                          Dept. 2017];
                                                                AD.3d 806 [2d Dept.        Fontanetta v John
                                                                                    2017]; Fontanetta        Doe
                                                                                                        John Doe
           I, 73 A.D.3d
           I,                  Dept. 2010]).
                 A.D.3d 78 [2d Dept. 2010]).
                   Where             evidence contradicts
                         documentary evidence
                   Where documentary          contradicts the allegations of
                                                          the allegations    the complaint,
                                                                          of the            the court
                                                                                 complaint, the court need not
                                                                                                      need not
           assume the
           assume the truthfulness
                      truthfulness of
                                   of the         allegations (West
                                          pleaded allegations
                                      the pleaded                   Branch Conservation
                                                              (West Branch              Assn, Inc., v County
                                                                           Conservation Assn,                of
                                                                                                      County of
           Rockland,
           Rockland, 227 AD.2d 547 [2d Dept.
                     227 A.D.2d                     Greene v Doral
                                             1996]; Greene
                                       Dept. 1996];                Conference Center
                                                             Doral Conference        Associates, 18 A.D.3d
                                                                              Center Associates,    AD.3d
           429
           429 [2d Dept.
                   Dept. 2005]);
                         2005]); Penato
                                 Penato v. George, 52 AD.2d
                                        v. George,                        Dept 1976]).
                                                             939, 941 [2d Dept
                                                      A.D.2d 939,              1976]). Allegations consisting of
                                                                                       Allegations consisting of
           bare
           bare legal
                legal conclusions
                      conclusions as well
                                     well as factual claims flatly
                                             factual claims                        documentary evidence
                                                                   contradicted by documentary
                                                            flatly contradicted                             not
                                                                                                        are not
                                                                                               evidence are
           entitled to any
           entitled    any such
                           such consideration (Connaughton v Chipotle
                                consideration (Connaughton   Chipotle Mexican                 N.Y.3d 137 [2017];
                                                                      Mexican Grill, Inc., 29 N.Y.3d     [2017];
           Duncan
           Duncan v Emeral
                    Emera/ Expositions
                           Expositions LLC,
                                       LLC, 186 A.D.3d          Dept. 2020];
                                                A.D.3d 1321 [2d Dept. 2020]; Dinerman   Jewish Bd. of
                                                                             Dinerman v Jewish        Family
                                                                                                   of Family
             Children's Services
           & Children's Services Inc., 55 AD.3d                2008]; Nisari
                                                         Dept. 2008];
                                          A.D.3d 530 [2d Dept.                  Ramjohn, 85 AD.3d
                                                                             v. Ramjohn,
                                                                      Nisari v.                         989 [2d
                                                                                                   987, 989
                                                                                            A.D.3d 987,
           Dept 2011
           Dept 2011]).  The defendant
                     ]). The defendant bears     burden of
                                       bears the burden    demonstrating that
                                                        of demonstrating                    evidence "conclusively
                                                                                  proffered evidence
                                                                         that the proffered          "conclusively
           refutes plaintiffs
           refutes                    allegations (Guggenheimer
                              factual allegations
                   plaintiffs factual                                               268 [1977];
                                                                               NY2d 268
                                                                  Ginzburg, 43 NY2d
                                                  (Guggenheimer v Ginzburg,                     Ko/chins v
                                                                                        [1977]; Kolchins
           Evolution
           Evolution Mias.
                     Mlcts. Inc., 31 NY3d     [2018]; Goshen
                                     NY3d 100 [2018]; Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. Co. of
                                                               Mutual Life                         314 [2002]).
                                                                                              NY2D 314
                                                                                    of NY, 98 NY2D     [2002]).
                   New
                   New York
                       York law generally recognizes
                            law generally            three remedies
                                          recognizes three                 attorney making
                                                           remedies for an attorney                    against a
                                                                                                 claim against
                                                                                    making a fee claim
           former client:
           former client: (1)
                          (1) the          lien, (2) the
                                  charging lien,
                              the charging               retaining lien, and
                                                     the retaining           (3) a plenary
                                                                         and (3)                     quantum meriut
                                                                                           action in quantum
                                                                                   plenary action            meriut
           (Levy v Laing,
           (Levy   Laing, 43 AD3d       I st Dept.
                             AD3d 713 [[1st                  charging lien is an equitable
                                                   2007]). A charging
                                             Dept. 2007]).                                 ownership interest,
                                                                                 equitable ownership interest,
           originating
           originating from
                       from common
                            common law and
                                       and later codified under
                                           later codified                 Law§S 475,
                                                                Judiciary Law
                                                          under Judiciary            which grants
                                                                                475, which           attorney, a
                                                                                           grants an attorney,
           property right
           property right in a client's
                               client's cause of action
                                        cause of              Maher v Quality
                                                          see Maher
                                                 action ((see                 Bus Services,
                                                                      Quality Bus Services, LLC,          990 [2d
                                                                                                     AD3d 990
                                                                                            LLC, 144 AD3d

                                                                  4

                                                              4 of 10
[* 4]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                              INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                                RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

           Dept. 2016]; J.K.c.
           Dept. 2016];          T.WC., 39 Misc.3d
                        J.K.C. v T.W.C.,                2013 NY
                                           Misc.3d 889, 2013    Slip. Op.
                                                             NY Slip.     23060 [Sup
                                                                      Op. 23060          Monroe County
                                                                                [Sup Ct, Monroe        2013];
                                                                                                County 2013];
           Chadbourne & Parke,
           Chadbourne      Parke, LLP
                                  LLP v AB
                                        AB Recur   Finans, 18 AD3d
                                            Recur Finans,             222 [1st
                                                               AD3d 222        Dept. 2005]).
                                                                          [1st Dept.              equitable ownership
                                                                                             This equitable
                                                                                     2005]). This           ownership
           interest cannot
           interest cannot subsequently
                           subsequently be              the client
                                           disturbed by the
                                        be disturbed                  anyone claiming
                                                            client or anyone claiming through  or against
                                                                                       through or         the client
                                                                                                  against the client
           (LMWT Realty
           (LMWT   Realty Corp. v Davis
                                   Davis Agency
                                         Agency Inc.,               (1995]). "Manifestly,
                                                         NY2d 462 (1995]).
                                                Inc., 85 NY2d                               then, an attorney's
                                                                              "Manifestly, then,      attorney's
           charging lien is something
           charging         something more
                                      more than
                                           than a mere        against either
                                                        claim against
                                                  mere claim                 property or
                                                                      either property or proceeds              vested
                                                                                                   ... it is a vested
                                                                                          proceeds ...
           property right
           property right created
                          created by law and not a priority
                                         and not               payment" (Id. at 467-468).
                                                            of payment"
                                                   priority of                                         charging lien,
                                                                                          Initially, a charging
                                                                                467-468). Initially,
           would automatically come
           would automatically come into existence, without
                                    into existence, without notice or filing,
                                                            notice or filing, upon commencement of
                                                                              upon commencement        of an
                                                                                                   the of
                                                                                                of the
           action and was
           action     was measured
                          measured by the
                                      the reasonable value of
                                          reasonable value                   services in the
                                                                  attorney's services
                                                           of the attorney's                         unless fixed by
                                                                                             action, unless
                                                                                         the action,
              agreement (Judiciary
           an agreement  (Judiciary Law
                                    Law §475;  LMWT Realty
                                         9475; LMWT                         Theroux v Theroux,
                                                                      467; Theroux
                                                      Realty Corp. at 467;                          AD 625 [2d
                                                                                       Theroux, 145 AD
           Dept.
           Dept. 1989]; Resnick
                        Resnick v Resnick,
                                   Resnick, 24 AD    238 [1st
                                               AD 3d 238 [1st Dept.          Effective January
                                                                    2005]). Effective
                                                              Dept. 2005]).                             Judiciary
                                                                                               I, 2013, Judiciary
                                                                                       January 1,2013,
           Law §
           Law  94475  was expanded
                   75 was                 include that
                            expanded to include            also applies
                                                   that it also                "initiation of
                                                                applies to the "initiation    any means
                                                                                           of any        of alternative
                                                                                                  means of  alternative
           dispute resolution
           dispute            ... or
                   resolution ... or the provision of
                                     the provision     services in a settlement
                                                    of services       settlement negotiation         stage of
                                                                                                 any stage
                                                                                  negotiation at any           the dispute
                                                                                                           of the  dispute
           (Judiciary Law
           (Judiciary Law §475;   Bonnaigv Walton,
                            9475; Bonnaigv              Misc. 3d 375,
                                             Walton, 41 Misc.          2013 NY
                                                                  375, 2013     Slip Op. 23185
                                                                            NY Slip                       NY County
                                                                                                [Sup Ct, NY
                                                                                         23185 [Sup           County
           2013]).
           2013     Thus, attorneys
                ]). Thus, attorneys seeking    enforce charging
                                    seeking to enforce                          not only
                                                                      may do so not
                                                       charging liens may           only with respect to an officially
                                                                                         with respect       officially
           commenced proceeding
           commenced proceeding but also for out-of-court
                                but also                  settlement agreements.
                                             out-of-court settlement agreements.
                   As a general
                        general rule,   charging lien follows
                                rule, a charging              the fund
                                                      follows the                   settlement of
                                                                       created by a settlement
                                                                  fund created                 of the       and it
                                                                                                      claim and
                                                                                                  the claim
           attaches to the
           attaches    the amount
                           amount agreed
                                  agreed upon    settlement the
                                         upon in settlement     instant that
                                                            the instant          agreement is made,
                                                                        that the agreement              if the
                                                                                                    and if
                                                                                              made, and
           defendant pays
           defendant      over to the
                     pays over    the client
                                      client without providing for the
                                             without providing              of the
                                                                   the lien of     attorney, he violates
                                                                               the attorney,                        of the
                                                                                                             rights of
                                                                                                violates the rights
           latter and must
           latter     must stand
                            stand the
                                  the consequences
                                      consequences (Fontana     Republic of
                                                    (Fontana v Republic      Argentina, 962
                                                                          of Argentina, 962 F.3d               2020];
                                                                                                  667 [2d Cir. 2020];
                                                                                            F.3d 667
           see In re Shirley
           see       Shirley Duke
                              Duke Assoc.,
                                    Assoc., 611 F2d             1979]; citing
                                                F2d 15 [2d Cir. 1979]; citing Fischer-Hansen     Brooklyn, Hgts. R. Co.,
                                                                              Fischer-Hansen v Brooklyn,
           173 NY
               NY 492         Chadbourne & Parke,
                      [1903]; Chadbourne
                  492 (1903];                     LLP at 223).
                                           Parke, LLP          Thus, an attorney
                                                         223). Thus,             may enforce
                                                                        attorney may enforce his lien against a
                                                                                                 lien against
           defendant who
           defendant who failed
                         failed to provide         attorney's fee because
                                               the attorney's
                                   provide for the                                    who has
                                                                            defendant who
                                                                  because a defendant                   of a
                                                                                              knowledge of
                                                                                          has knowledge
           plaintiffs
           plaintiffs attorney's                  affirmative duty
                                         under an affirmative
                      attorney's lien is under                duty to protect           and if
                                                                              the lien, and
                                                                      protect the           ifhe  fails to do so, he is
                                                                                               he fails
           liable for the
           liable     the reasonable
                          reasonable value
                                     value of
                                           of that            services to his client
                                                   attorney's services
                                              that attorney's                        (Fontana at 676;
                                                                              client (Fontana         Fischer-Hansen at
                                                                                                 676; Fischer-Hansen
           501; Sargent
                Sargent v New               HR.R. Co., 209 NY
                              York Cent. & HR.R.
                          New York                            360 (1913];
                                                           NY 360                see also
                                                                         [1913]; see also Schneider,  Kleinick, Weitz,
                                                                                           Schneider, Kleinick,
           Damashek     Shoot v City
           Damashek & Shoot     City of
                                     of New                                     2002]; citing
                                                                          Dept. 2002];
                                        New York, 302 AD 2d 183 [[1I stsl Dept.                Sehlmeyer v Universal
                                                                                        citing Sehlmeyer    Universal
           Oven Co.,
           Oven Co., 118 AD2d
                          AD2d 692
                                 692 (2d  Dept. 1986]).
                                     [2d Dept.             charging lien thus
                                                1986]). A charging                    enforced even
                                                                               may be enforced
                                                                          thus may              even when       proceeds
                                                                                                     when the proceeds
           have passed
           have passed into the
                            the possession
                                possession of
                                           of the
                                              the client      third party
                                                  client or a third       with knowledge,
                                                                    party with             although the
                                                                               knowledge, although      right to enforce
                                                                                                    the right    enforce
           such a lien will
           such        will be waived
                               waived by any
                                         any action
                                             action inconsistent         intent to enforce
                                                                 with an intent
                                                    inconsistent with                      the lien (see
                                                                                   enforce the           Kaplan v
                                                                                                    (see Kaplan
           Reuss,
           Reuss, 113 AD
                       AD 2d 184 [2d Dept.
                                      Dept. 1985]; Fontana     Republic of
                                                    Fontana v Republic     Argentina, 2021 WL
                                                                        of Argentina,             4481874 [SONY
                                                                                             WL 4481874    [SDNY
           2021];
           2021    Sprole v Sprole,
                ]; Sprole   Sprole, l152
                                      52 AD3d                       Goldstein, Goldman,
                                                             2017]; Goldstein,
                                                       Dept. 2017];
                                         AD3d 1094 [3d Dept.                   Goldman, Kessler,   Underberg v
                                                                                        Kessler, & Underberg
           4000 East
           4000  East River
                      River Road
                             Road Associates,
                                   Associates, 64 AD2d
                                                   AD2d 484484 [4d 1978]).  Moreover, the
                                                                    1978]). Moreover,      Court of
                                                                                       the Court    Appeals has
                                                                                                 of Appeals
           repeatedly held
           repeatedly held that
                            that an attorney's      attaches to a settlement
                                    attorney's lien attaches                         instances where
                                                                             even in instances
                                                                  settlement even                        settlement was
                                                                                                     the settlement
                                                                                               where the
           made
           made without
                without the attorney's knowledge,
                        the attorney's            participation in the
                                       knowledge, participation        settlement or
                                                                   the settlement or where the attorney
                                                                                     where the          withdrew
                                                                                               attorney withdrew

                                                                    5

                                                               5 of 10
[* 5]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                           INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                              RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

           prior
           prior to the
                    the negotiation of that
                        negotiation of      settlement (see
                                       that settlement (see Fischer-Hansen; Sargent at 365;
                                                            Fischer-Hansen; Sargent    365; Klein              NY2d
                                                                                                    Eubank, 87 NY2d
                                                                                            Klein v Eubank,
           459 [1996]).
           459 [1996]). The
                        The one exception to an attorney's
                            one exception                                           when the
                                                           entitlement to a lien is when
                                                attorney's entitlement                                   terminated for
                                                                                             attorney is terminated
                                                                                         the attorney
           cause (Klein
           cause (Klein v Eubank,
                          Eubank, 87 NY2d 459 [1996];
                                     NY2d 459         Maher v Quality
                                              [1996]; Maher   Quality Bus Service, LLC,
                                                                      Bus Service,               990 [2d
                                                                                            AD3d 990
                                                                                   LLC, 144 AD3d
           Dept. 2016];
           Dept. 2016]; Callaghan
                        Callaghan v Callaghan,    AD3d 500 [2d Dept.
                                    Callaghan, 48 AD3d                       While termination
                                                                     2008]). While
                                                               Dept. 2008]).                            may be
                                                                                                  cause may
                                                                                   termination by cause
           based
           based upon either negligence
                 upon either negligence or misconduct, more than
                                           misconduct, more        generalized dissatisfaction
                                                            than a generalized                 with counsel's
                                                                               dissatisfaction with counsel's
           services is required
           services    required and
                                and the
                                    the client must make
                                        client must        prima facie
                                                    make a prima       showing of
                                                                 facie showing    cause in order
                                                                               of cause             trigger a hearing
                                                                                           order to trigger   hearing
              the issue
           on the issue (Maher
                        (Maher at 992;
                                  992; Roe
                                       Roe v Roe,
                                             Roe, 117 AD3d                2014]; Chadbourne
                                                                    Dept. 2014];
                                                      AD3d 1217 [3d Dept.                            LLP at
                                                                                              Parke, LLP
                                                                                 Chadbourne & Parke,
           222).
           222).
                   Here, the
                   Here, the court
                             court finds
                                   finds that
                                         that documentary evidence submitted
                                              documentary evidence              SCA did
                                                                   submitted by SCA         utterly refute
                                                                                        not utterly
                                                                                    did not         refute
           Plaintiffs factual allegations
           Plaintiffs factual allegations that     held funds
                                               SCA held
                                          that SCA            belonging to Plaintiff
                                                        funds belonging              or in which
                                                                           Plaintiff or                    had an
                                                                                                 Plaintiff had
                                                                                           which Plaintiff
           interest in and failed
           interest        failed to payout     required, nor
                                     pay out as required,                  establish a defense
                                                              conclusively establish
                                                          nor conclusively                                 of law. SCA
                                                                                                    matter of
                                                                                       defense as a matter         SCA
           submits a
           submits    copy of
                   11 copy of the
                              the Engagement
                                   Engagement Letter      Retainer Agreement,
                                               Letter and Retainer               copy of
                                                                   Agreement, a copy  of the Purchase and Sale
                                                                                         the Purchase     Sale
           Agreement, a copy
           Agreement,     copy of
                                of the
                                   the Warranty
                                       Warranty Deed        December 11,
                                                      dated December
                                                Deed dated                 2020, by 35 Delevan
                                                                       11,2020,                         LLC granting
                                                                                                Owners LLC
                                                                                       Delevan Owners        granting
           to 21 and 35 Delevan
                        Delevan LLC
                                LLC title
                                    title to the                 copy of
                                                 property, and a copy
                                             the property,            of the Closing Settlement
                                                                         the Closing                      issued by
                                                                                                Statement issued
                                                                                     Settlement Statement
           Old Republic
           Old Republic National            Title Services
                                 Commercial Title
                        National Commercial                              with the
                                                              connection with
                                                  Services in connection                     May 26, 2022,
                                                                                  closing on May
                                                                              the closing            2022,
           between           Delevan LLC
           between 21 and 35 Delevan                     SCA as "purchaser."
                                            "seller" and SCA
                                     LLC as "seller"            "purchaser."
                   While a retainer
                   While   retainer agreement
                                    agreement alone
                                              alone may    insufficient to establish
                                                    may be insufficient                 "appearance" under
                                                                           establish an "appearance" under
           Judiciary Law
           Judiciary Law 475 (see
                             (see Cataldo
                                   Cataldo v Budget   Rent A Car
                                              Budget Rent                      NY2d 811(1997]),
                                                                  Corp., 89 NY2d
                                                             Car Corp.,                                            that 35
                                                                                                        undisputed that
                                                                                      811[1997]), it is undisputed
           Delevan and Harbor
           Delevan      Harbor retained  Plaintiffs predecessor-in-inter
                               retained Plaintiffs                                 agreed to pay
                                                                               and agreed
                                                    predecessor-in-interestest and                 contingency fee in
                                                                                             pay a contingency
           exchange for legal
           exchange     legal services relating to its condemnation
                              services relating        condemnation proceeding.       also undisputed
                                                                    proceeding. It is also            that 35
                                                                                           undisputed that
           Delevan's
           Delevan's name
                     name change
                          change to "21 and
                                        and 35 Delevan      was a change
                                                       LLC" was
                                               Delevan LLC"       change in name only and
                                                                            name only and not ownership, and
                                                                                          not ownership,
           that 21 and 3
           that        355 Delevan
                           Delevan LLC agreed to be bound
                                   LLC agreed                       original Engagement
                                                          under the original
                                                    bound under                                and Retainer
                                                                                        Letter and
                                                                             Engagement Letter     Retainer
           Agreement.
           Agreement. Furthermore, SCA does
                      Furthermore, SCA does not dispute that
                                            not dispute         commenced a condemnation
                                                        that it commenced                proceeding by
                                                                            condemnation proceeding
           sending Notice
           sending Notice of
                          of a Public
                               Public Hearing
                                      Hearing nor does it argue
                                              nor does             proffer evidence
                                                          argue or proffer          that Plaintiff
                                                                           evidence that           did not
                                                                                         Plaintiff did     engage in
                                                                                                       not engage
           settlement negotiations.
           settlement negotiations.
                   SCA cites
                   SCA cites Schneider,
                             Schneider, Kleinick,
                                        Kleinick, Weitz, Damashek           City of
                                                                    Shoot v City
                                                         Damashek & Shoot        of New           AD 2d
                                                                                    New York, 302 AD
                     Dept. 2002)
               (lS!1 Dept.
           183 (P          2002) and Chesley v Union Carbide
                                 and Chesley                 Corp., 927
                                                     Carbide Corp.,     F.2d 60 (2d
                                                                    927 F.2d             1991) to support
                                                                                    Cir. 1991)
                                                                                (2d Cir.          support
               position that
           the position that filing   formal proceeding
                             filing a formal                            order for there
                                                           necessary in order
                                             proceeding is necessary                          statutory liability
                                                                                  there to be statutory liability
           against third
           against third parties
                         parties because the court
                                 because the       must have
                                             court must      jurisdiction over
                                                        have jurisdiction      the third
                                                                          over the third party and the
                                                                                         party and the
           settlement funds.
           settlement funds. Not
                             Not only
                                 only does
                                      does that
                                           that claim
                                                claim fail to rebut the settlement
                                                              rebut the settlement negotiation          that
                                                                                               language that
                                                                                   negotiation language
           was added
           was added to Judiciary Law S 475 by the
                        Judiciary Law§             2012 amendment
                                               the 2012                                          of the
                                                                                   contravention of
                                                                            direct contravention
                                                        amendment but is in direct
           statute which
           statute       states that
                   which states      "the court
                                that "the court upon
                                                upon the Petition of
                                                     the Petition of the           the attorney
                                                                         client or the
                                                                     the client                 may determine
                                                                                       attorney may determine
           and enforce
           and enforce the
                       the lien"
                           lien" (see
                                 (see Judiciary Law 9 475).
                                      Judiciary Law§  475). Moreover,    stated in Schenider,
                                                            Moreover, as stated               enforcement of
                                                                                   Schenider, enforcement of
             charging lien is founded
           a charging         founded upon               notion that
                                               equitable notion
                                      upon the equitable        that the proceeds of
                                                                     the proceeds      settlement are
                                                                                  of a settlement

                                                                  6

                                                              6 of 10
[* 6]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                                               INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                                               RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

           ultimately under
           ultimately       the control
                      under the         of the
                                control of           and the
                                               court and
                                           the court         parties within
                                                         the parties            jurisdiction (see
                                                                     within its jurisdiction      Rooney v
                                                                                             (see Rooney
           Second A.R
           Second A.R Co., 18 NY       1885]). Similarly,
                                 368 [[1885]).
                              NY 368           Similarly, the court in Chesley
                                                          the court    Chesley held not only
                                                                               held not      that lower
                                                                                        only that lower
           District
           District Court's
                    Court's forum
                            forum non conveniens
                                      conveniens dismissal did not
                                                 dismissal did                   preclude any
                                                                   automatically preclude
                                                               not automatically                         of
                                                                                              invocation of
                                                                                          any invocation
           ancillary jurisdiction
           ancillary                              appellant's application
                                     consider the appellant's
                     jurisdiction to consider                                                  but also
                                                                              attorney's fees, but
                                                              application for attorney's                that the
                                                                                                   also that the
           ability               action for forum
                      dismiss an action
           ability to dismiss               forum non conveniens is only
                                                  non conveniens         possible if
                                                                    only possible if the court initially
                                                                                     the court           had
                                                                                               initially had
           jurisdiction.
           jurisdiction. 1I Thus,
                            Thus, Plaintiff
                                  Plaintiff has                      facts to support
                                                             alleged facts
                                                sufficiently alleged
                                            has sufficiently                          that it appeared
                                                                              support that             or
                                                                                              appeared or
           participated in negotiation
           participated                   required by statute.
                           negotiation as required    statute.
                     Under Judiciary
                     Under           Law S 475,
                           Judiciary Law§          formal notice
                                           475, no formal                     thus it is immaterial
                                                                    required, thus
                                                          notice is required,                       that Plaintiff's
                                                                                         immaterial that Plaintiff's
           Notices of Liens
           Notices of Liens were                   notice is only
                                           because notice
                                 defective because
                            were defective                        required under
                                                             only required       Judiciary Law
                                                                           under Judiciary               Plaintiff is
                                                                                               475-a and Plaintiff
                                                                                           Law 475-a
           not
           not relying
               relying on §475-a.           Law§S 475 is initiated
                                  Judiciary Law
                          s475-a. Judiciary                           either the
                                                         initiated by either                  of an action
                                                                                 commencement of
                                                                             the commencement                 the
                                                                                                    action or the
           invocation of
           invocation of settlement
                         settlement negotiations,         S 4475-a
                                                  whereas §
                                    negotiations, whereas                       only if
                                                                      initiated only
                                                              75-a is initiated         prior to the
                                                                                     if prior        commencement of
                                                                                                 the commencement of
              action or
           an action or the invocation of
                        the invocation of settlement negotiations, an attorney
                                          settlement negotiations,             serves a notice
                                                                      attorney serves          of lien upon
                                                                                        notice of               person
                                                                                                            the person
                                                                                                       upon the
           or
           or persons
              persons against
                      against whom
                              whom his or
                                       or her client has or
                                          her client        may have
                                                         or may              or cause
                                                                       claim or
                                                                have a claim          of action.
                                                                                cause of            that instance,
                                                                                         action. In that           the
                                                                                                         instance, the
           attorney            upon the
           attorney has a lien upon           or cause
                                        claim or
                                    the claim             action from the time
                                                       of action
                                                 cause of                           notice is given.
                                                                               such notice
                                                                          time such           given.
                     SCA cites
                     SCA cites language
                               language from
                                        from the Engagement Letter,
                                             the Engagement         paragraphs 2,
                                                            Letter, paragraphs    3(1), and
                                                                               2,3(1),      9(d)(I) of
                                                                                        and 9(d)(l)    the Purchase
                                                                                                    of the Purchase
           and Sale
           and Sale Agreement,
                    Agreement, to support
                                  support that under the
                                          that under     terms of
                                                     the terms    the agreements
                                                               of the            that Plaintiffs
                                                                      agreements that             entitlement to any
                                                                                      Plaintiff's entitlement    any
           funds can
           funds can only
                     only arises
                          arises once
                                 once money leaves SCA's
                                      money leaves       hands and are delivered
                                                   SCA's hands                                     Harbor, which
                                                                                       Delevan and Harbor,
                                                                       delivered to 35 Delevan             which
           never happened
           never happened because SCA never
                          because SCA       possessed any
                                      never possessed     funds. However,
                                                      any funds.          since Plaintiff
                                                                 However, since                   that it has
                                                                                          alleges that
                                                                                Plaintiff alleges         has
           appeared or participated
           appeared                                            under§S 475,
                                                  negotiations under
                                       settlement negotiations
                       participated in settlement                      475, the                     follow the fund
                                                                                              would follow
                                                                                charging lien would
                                                                            the charging
           created
           created by the
                      the settlement
                          settlement and
                                     and attach to the
                                         attach to     amount agreed
                                                   the amount        upon the
                                                              agreed upon     instant that
                                                                          the instant      the agreement
                                                                                      that the              made.
                                                                                               agreement is made.
                     Contrary to SCA's
                     Contrary                                Law S 475 may
                                                   Judiciary Law§
                                       contention, Judiciary
                                 SCA's contention,                                  third parties
                                                                           apply to third
                                                                       may apply                  who knowingly
                                                                                          parties who knowingly
           transfer
           transfer proceeds of a settlement
                    proceeds of   settlement without                   attorney's liens.
                                                     accounting for an attorney's
                                             without accounting                   liens. Here,     Engagement Letter
                                                                                               the Engagement
                                                                                         Here, the            Letter
           and Retainer
               Retainer Agreement defines "amounts
                        Agreement defines "amounts received"            proceeds obtained
                                                                include proceeds
                                                   received" to include                   by settlement.
                                                                                 obtained by settlement.
           Additionally, it states
           Additionally,                   that that
                                      part that
                            states in part                attorneys' fee shall
                                                     "the attorneys'
                                                that "the                                         gross amount
                                                                                  computed on the gross
                                                                         shall be computed              amount
           recovered,"
           recovered," that "Goldstein. Rikon,
                       that "Goldstein.                Houghton. P.C. shall
                                               Rikon & Houghton.
                                        Rikon, Rikon                        have exclusive
                                                                      shall have exclusive right    negotiate any
                                                                                           right to negotiate
           settlement on behalf
           settlement           of the
                         behalf of     Client," and
                                   the Client," and that "said attorneys'
                                                    that "said            compensation and
                                                               attorneys' compensation     disbursements are to be
                                                                                       and disbursements
           paid        when the
           paid as and when     award is paid
                            the award            the condemnor."
                                         paid by the condemnor."
                     Furthermore, Paragraph
                     Furthermore,           3(1)(t) of
                                  Paragraph 3(l)(t)        Purchase and Sale Agreement
                                                    of the Purchase                    states that:
                                                                             Agreement states that:
                               "On the
                               "On     Closing Date,
                                   the Closing       the Property
                                               Date, the                   conveyed ...
                                                                  shall be conveyed
                                                         Property shall                           form for
                                                                                           proper form
                                                                                    ... in proper
                               recording ... so as to
                               recording ...                 to Purchaser
                                                      convey to
                                                   to convey                    marketable and
                                                                          good, marketable
                                                                Purchaser good,                insurable
                                                                                           and insurable
                               fee simple
                                   simple title
                                          title to the Property, subject
                                                   the Property,         only to the following
                                                                 subject only                  exceptions to
                                                                                     following exceptions

           I In Chesley,
           1    Chesley, the
                          the court
                              court did not
                                          not dismiss
                                              dismiss the
                                                       the matter     the grounds
                                                           matter on the            that it lost
                                                                          grounds that           jurisdiction over
                                                                                            lost jurisdiction   over the  settlement funds
                                                                                                                     the settlement    funds to
           the
           the court
               court in India,
                         India, but
                                but rather
                                    rather because
                                            because it would    have been
                                                        would have            abuse of
                                                                     been an abuse       discretion for the
                                                                                      of discretion        the lower  district court
                                                                                                               lower district            have
                                                                                                                                court to have
           considered the
           considered                         application in view
                            petitioner's fee application
                        the petitioner's                            of the
                                                               view of     fact that
                                                                       the fact      they never
                                                                                that they          appeared on behalf
                                                                                           never appeared                 of any
                                                                                                                  behalf of        parties in the
                                                                                                                              any parties
           Indian litigation
           Indian litigation nor
                              nor had
                                   had they  made an application
                                        they made                       payment of
                                                        application for payment       the settlement
                                                                                  of the                          India beforehand.
                                                                                                        funds in India
                                                                                          settlement funds               beforehand.

                                                                             7

                                                                        7 of 10
[* 7]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                                INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                               RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

                           title: liens against
                           title: liens                      of the sale
                                                    proceeds of
                                        against the proceeds                    Property or
                                                                         of the Property
                                                                    sale of                 against
                                                                                         or against
                           Seller's files relating
                           Seller's                       Property, including
                                          relating to the Property,                   limited to liens
                                                                                  not limited
                                                                              but not
                                                                    including but                      filed
                                                                                                 liens filed
                           or
                           or asserted    Seller's [prior
                                       by Seller's
                              asserted by                               however which
                                                          counsel]. ....however
                                                   [prior counsel).                   lien(s) shall
                                                                                which lien(s)       be
                                                                                              shall be
                           treated    set forth
                           treated as set                    below."
                                                   Article 4 below."
                                          forth in Article
                              of the
                  Paragraph 4 of
                  Paragraph          Purchase and
                                 the Purchase          Agreement states
                                                  Sale Agreement
                                              and Sale                  that:
                                                                 states that:
                           "If,
                           "If, on the
                                   the Closing Date, the
                                       Closing Date,                 affected by any
                                                         Property is affected
                                                     the Property                         which,
                                                                                 any lien which,
                           pursuant    the provisions
                           pursuant to the            of this
                                           provisions of      Agreement, Seller
                                                         this Agreement,           required to
                                                                         Seller is required
                           discharge or satisfY,
                           discharge or              provisions of
                                        satisfy, the provisions               below shall
                                                                   Section 11 below
                                                                ofSection                    applicable
                                                                                    shall be applicable
                                respect to such
                           with respect
                           with                 lien."
                                           such lien."
                           "The foregoing
                           "The           notwithstanding, Seller
                                foregoing notwithstanding, Seller shall            defend and
                                                                        indemnify, defend
                                                                  shall indemnify,            hold-
                                                                                          and hold-
                           harmless
                           harmless the Purchaser from the "attorneys'
                                    the Purchaser          "attorneys' lien" noted in Sections
                                                                       lien" noted             3 l(t)
                                                                                      Sections 3I(t)
                           and 5 (A)(x)
                           and   (A)(x) herein,
                                        herein, including         limitation, attorneys'
                                                          without limitation,
                                                including without                        fees and
                                                                              attorneys' fees
                           expenses incurred in the
                           expenses incurred                  of such
                                                    discharge of
                                                the discharge    such lien. The provisions of
                                                                            The provisions    the
                                                                                           of the
                           preceding sentence shall
                           preceding sentence                   Closing."
                                                    survive the Closing."
                                              shall survive
                             S(A)(x) of
                   Paragraph 5(A)(x)
                   Paragraph            the Purchase
                                     of the                   Agreement states
                                                         Sale Agreement
                                            Purchase and Sale                  that:
                                                                        states that:
                           "To Seller's
                           "To Seller's knowledge, there are no claims,
                                        knowledge, there                litigation or
                                                                claims, litigation    proceedings or
                                                                                   or proceedings
                           governmental investigations pending
                           governmental investigations                the knowledge
                                                       pending or, to the           of Seller,
                                                                          knowledge of Seller,
                           threatened    writing against
                           threatened in writing            relating to Seller
                                                 against or relating                  Property that
                                                                                  the Property
                                                                        Seller or the               could
                                                                                               that could
                           have   material adverse
                           have a material         effect on Seller's
                                           adverse effect    Seller's title        Property, except
                                                                               the Property,
                                                                      title to the                  for
                                                                                             except for
                           claims, litigation or
                           claims, litigation          now or
                                                 liens now
                                              or liens                  filed or asserted
                                                              hereafter filed
                                                           or hereafter                      Seller's
                                                                                          by Seller's
                                                                                 asserted by
                          prior
                          prior counsel,
                                counsel, Goldstein,
                                         Goldstein, Rikon, Rikon & Levi,
                                                    Rikon, Rikon               with respect
                                                                         P.C., with
                                                                   Levi, p,e,                  the ·
                                                                                    respect to the.
                          proceeds of
                          proceeds                    Property or
                                               of the Property
                                          sale of
                                   of the sale                 or Seller's files relating
                                                                  Seller'sfiles                  Property
                                                                                 relating to the Property
                           (or both),
                               both), which
                                      which Purchaser acknowledges have
                                            Purchaser acknowledges           disclosed by
                                                                        been disclosed
                                                                   have been              Seller,
                                                                                       by Seller,
                           and
                           and which
                               which nevertheless will be treated
                                     nevertheless will                   forth in Article
                                                                     set forth
                                                          treated as set                    hereof."
                                                                                  Article 4 hereof."
                   Paragraph 11
                   Paragraph 11 of     Purchase and
                                   the Purchase
                                of the                   Agreement states
                                                    Sale Agreement
                                                and Sale                          that:
                                                                             part that:
                                                                   states in part
                           "If    the date
                           "If on the      of Closing
                                      date of         there are any other
                                              Closing there               liens or encumbrances
                                                                    other liens    encumbrances
                           (besides property taxes,
                           (besides property        assessments, water
                                             taxes, assessments,           sewer charges),
                                                                 water and sewer           which
                                                                                 charges), which
                           Seller    obligated to pay
                           Seller is obligated            discharge under
                                                  pay and discharge           terms of
                                                                          the terms
                                                                    under the          this
                                                                                    of this
                           Agreement, Seller may
                           Agreement, Seller             portion of
                                             may use any portion        balance of
                                                                    the balance
                                                                 of the         of the Purchase
                                                                                   the Purchase
                           Price to satisfy
                           Price    satisfy the      ... "
                                                same ...
                                            the same
                   Plaintiff
                   Plaintiff sent
                             sent a copy
                                    copy of   Notice of
                                         of a Notice    Lien and
                                                     of Lien        Amended Notice
                                                             and an Amended        of Lien
                                                                            Notice of                April 11,
                                                                                              SCA on April
                                                                                      Lien to SCA
           2022, and a copy
           2022,       copy of
                            of an Amended Notice of
                                  Amended Notice                title company
                                                            the title
                                                 of Lien to the                            2022, and according
                                                                                 April 21, 2022,
                                                                      company on April               according to
           the
           the Closing Settlement Statement
               Closing Settlement Statement dated         2022, SCA
                                                  May 26, 2022,
                                            dated May               paid a total
                                                                SCA paid         of $32,730,000
                                                                           total of                    title
                                                                                    $32,730,000 to the title

                                                                  8

                                                              8 of 10
[* 8]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                            INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

           company,
           company, of
                    of which
                       which "21 and
                                 and 35 Delevan
                                        Delevan LLC" received $21,669,999.18
                                                LLC" received $21,669,999.18 from the title
                                                                             from the               after
                                                                                            company after
                                                                                      title company
           apportionment.
           apportionment.
                   Accordingly,
                   Accordingly, the documentary evidence submitted
                                    documentary evidence           does not
                                                         submitted does                  refute allegations
                                                                            conclusively refute
                                                                        not conclusively                    that
                                                                                                allegations that
           Defendants not
           Defendants not only
                          only knew
                               knew about
                                    about Plaintiff's charging lien but paid
                                          Plaintiff's charging                   the settlement
                                                                             out the
                                                                        paid out     settlement proceeds after the
                                                                                                proceeds after
           lien arose
                arose and
                      and attached
                          attached to the
                                      the proceeds
                                          proceeds without
                                                   without paying Plaintiff and while
                                                           paying Plaintiff           SCA states
                                                                                while SCA states that           was
                                                                                                      Plaintiff was
                                                                                                 that Plaintiff
           fired for cause,
                     cause, which
                            which would
                                  would eliminate
                                        eliminate its entitlement                     SCA's bare
                                                                       charging lien, SCA's
                                                      entitlement to a charging                  conclusory statement
                                                                                            bare conclusory statement
           without
           without more    insufficient to rebut
                   more in insufficient    rebut Plaintiff's             trigger a hearing
                                                             claim or to trigger
                                                 Plaintiffs claim                             the issue.
                                                                                   hearing on the issue.
                   When a party
                   When   party moves
                                moves to dismiss             pursuant to CPLR
                                                   complaint pursuant
                                         dismiss a complaint                  S 321 l(a)(7),
                                                                         CPLR §                  standard is
                                                                                             the standard
                                                                                    I(a)(7), the
           whether
           whether the pleading states a cause
                       pleading states   cause of
                                               of action, n·ot whether
                                                  action, riot             proponent of
                                                               whether the proponent of the                cause of
                                                                                            pleading has a cause
                                                                                        the pleading             of
           action (Leon
           action (Leon v.
                        v. Martinez,    NY2d 83, 87 [1994];
                           Martinez, 84 NY2d                Skefalidis v China
                                                    [1994]; Skefalidis         Pagoda NY, Inc.,
                                                                         China Pagoda               A.O. 3d 925
                                                                                                210 AD.
                                                                                          Inc., 210
           [2d Dept. 2022]);
                     2022]); Oluwo
                             Oluwo v Sutton, 206 A.D.3d
                                     Sutton, 206                Dept. 2022];
                                                 A.D.3d 750 [2d Dept.        Sokol v Leader,
                                                                      2022]; Sokol              A.D.3d 1180 [2d
                                                                                     Leader, 74 AD.3d
           Dept.
           Dept. 2010]).
                 2010]). Whether
                         Whether a plaintiff
                                   plaintiff can
                                             can ultimately
                                                 ultimately establish     allegations is not
                                                            establish its allegations        part of
                                                                                         not part        calculus in
                                                                                                     the calculus
                                                                                                  of the
           determining a motion
           determining   motion to dismiss
                                   dismiss (Eskridge   Diocese of
                                           (Eskridge v Diocese    Brooklyn, 210 A.D.3d
                                                               of Brooklyn,                    Dept. 2022];
                                                                                AD.3d 1056 [2d Dept. 2022];
           Zurich
           Zurich American
                  American Insurance           City of
                                     Company v City
                           Insurance Company        of New           A.D.3d 1145 [2d Dept.
                                                       New York, 176 AD.3d                        EBC I Inc. v
                                                                                           2019]; EBC
                                                                                     Dept. 2019];
           Goldman, Sachs
           Goldman,                NY3d [2005]).
                    Sachs & Co., 5 NY3d [2005]).
                   On a motion
                        motion to dismiss
                                  dismiss a complaint
                                            complaint pursuant         S 32
                                                                  CPLR §
                                                      pursuant to CPLR      l l(a)(7),
                                                                         3211          the burden
                                                                               (a)(7), the        never shifts
                                                                                           burden never shifts to the
           non-moving party
           non-moving party to rebut
                               rebut a defense
                                       defense asserted        moving party
                                               asserted by the moving       (Sokol at 1181;
                                                                      party (Sokol          Rove/lo v Orofino
                                                                                      1181; Rovello   Orofino
           Realty
           Realty Co. Inc.,
                      Inc., 40 NY2d 970 [1976]).
                               NY2d 970 [1976]). CPLR S 3211 allows
                                                 CPLR §                            submit affidavits,
                                                                      plaintiff to submit
                                                             allows a plaintiff                       but it does not
                                                                                          affidavits, but
           oblige him or
           oblige     or her
                         her to do so on penalty
                                         penalty of
                                                 of dismissal       Sokol at 1181
                                                    dismissal (Id.; Sokol         ). Affidavits
                                                                             1181).                    received for a
                                                                                                may be received
                                                                                     Affidavits may
           limited purpose
           limited         only, serving
                   purpose only, serving normally    remedy defects
                                         normally to remedy            the complaint
                                                            defects in the           and such
                                                                           complaint and                     not to
                                                                                              affidavits are not
                                                                                         such affidavits
           be examined
              examined for the purpose of
                           the purpose of determining
                                          determining whether          evidentiary support
                                                              there is evidentiary
                                                      whether there                support for the pleading (Id.;
                                                                                               the pleading
           Rovello    635; Nonon
           Rove/lo at 635;          827). Thus,
                           Nonon at 827). Thus, a plaintiff
                                                  plaintiff will not be penalized
                                                            will not              because he has
                                                                        penalized because            made an
                                                                                                 not made
                                                                                             has not
           evidentiary showing in support
           evidentiary showing    support of     complaint.
                                          of its complaint.
                   Unlike on a motion
                   Unlike      motion for summary
                                          summary judgment, where the
                                                  judgment, where           searches the
                                                                      court searches
                                                                  the court                         assesses the
                                                                                         record and assesses
                                                                                     the record
           sufficiency of
           sufficiency of evidence,
                          evidence, on a motion
                                         motion to dismiss,
                                                   dismiss, the court merely examines
                                                                court merely examines the adequacy of
                                                                                      the adequacy of the pleadings
                                                                                                      the pleadings
           (Davis v.
           (Davis v. Boeheim,
                     Boeheim, 24 NY3d 262, 268
                                 NY3d 262, 268 [2014
                                               [2014]).  The appropriate
                                                     ]). The             test of
                                                             appropriate test        sufficiency of
                                                                              of the sufficiency      pleading is
                                                                                                 of a pleading
           whether such pleading
           whether such          gives sufficient
                        pleading gives            notice of
                                       sufficient notice        transactions, occurrences,
                                                         of the transactions,                 series of
                                                                              occurrences, or series    transactions or
                                                                                                     of transactions
           occurrences intended
           occurrences intended to be proved
                                      proved and
                                             and whether the requisite
                                                 whether the           elements of
                                                             requisite elements    any cause
                                                                                of any       of action
                                                                                       cause of        known to our
                                                                                                action known    our
           law can be discerned
                      discerned from its averments
                                         averments ((V.        Pools, Inc. v.
                                                        Groppa Pools,
                                                     V. Groppa             v. Massello,     AD3d 722, 723 [2d Dept
                                                                              Masse/lo, 106 AD3d              Dept
           2013]; Moore   Johnson, 14
                  Moore v Johnson,                   Dept 1989]).
                                        AD2d 621 [2d Dept
                                   1477 AD2d              1989]).
                     constructive bailment
                   A constructive             one implied
                                  bailment is one                         comes into lawful
                                                                      one comes
                                                                 when one
                                                  implied by law when                       possession of
                                                                                     lawful possession of
           another's
           another's personal
                     personal property,
                              property, other
                                        other than           contract (Martin
                                                      mutual contract
                                              than by mutual          (Martin v Briggs,     AD2d 192 [1st
                                                                                Briggs, 235 AD2d
           Dept. 1997]; Mack
           Dept.        Mack v Davidson,    AD2d 1027
                               Davidson, 55 AD2d                 1977]). It is the
                                                           Dept. 1977]).
                                                 1027 [4th Dept.                           of lawful
                                                                                   element of
                                                                               the element    lawful
           possession,
           possession, however created, and the
                       however created,         duty to account
                                            the duty                             the property
                                                                        thing as the
                                                        account for the thing                 of another
                                                                                     property of         that
                                                                                                 another that

                                                                  9

                                                              9 of 10
[* 9]
  FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 01/05/2024 10:48 AM                                                           INDEX NO. 513884/2022
  NYSCEF DOC. NO. 36                                                                             RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/05/2024

                                                                   ,
                                                                   '
           creates
           creates the
                   the bailment
                       bailment (Martin
                                (Martin at 197; Foulke
                                                Foulke v New                   Railroad Co., 228
                                                                  Consolidated Railroad
                                                         New York Consolidated                   NY 269
                                                                                             228 NY
           [1920]).
           [l 920]). A bailment
                       bailment may arise from the
                                may arise          bare fact of
                                               the bare      of the thing coming
                                                                the thing             the actual
                                                                          coming into the        possession
                                                                                          actual possession
           and control
               control of
                       of a person
                            person fortuitously,
                                   fortuitously, or    mistake as to the duty
                                                 or by mistake                   ability of
                                                                              or ability
                                                                         duty or                recipient to
                                                                                            the recipient
                                                                                         of the
           affect
           affect the
                  the purpose
                      purpose contemplated
                              contemplated by the
                                              the absolute             Phelps v People,
                                                           owner (Id.; Phelps
                                                  absolute owner                              334 [1878]).
                                                                                           NY 334
                                                                                People, 72 NY     [1878]).
           Additionally,
           Additionally, taking
                         taking lawful
                                lawful possession without present
                                       possession without                   appropriate creates
                                                                  intent to appropriate
                                                          present intent                          bailment
                                                                                        creates a bailment
           (Id.; Seaboard
                 Seaboard Sand                  Morgan Towing
                                 Gravel Corp. v Morgan
                          Sand & Gravel                                  F .2d 399
                                                              Corp., 154 F.2d
                                                       Towing Corp.,                   Cir. 1946]).
                                                                               399 [2d Cir. 1946]).
                   Here,
                   Here, Plaintiff
                         Plaintiff has
                                   has sufficiently stated a cause
                                       sufficiently stated            action for a constructive
                                                                   of action
                                                             cause of                                    inter
                                                                                                bailment inter
                                                                                   constructive bailment
           alia
           alia paragraphs    though 47 of
                paragraphs 42 though                    Complaint.
                                               Verified Complaint.
                                        of its Verified
                    Accordingly,       hereby,
                    Accordingly, it is hereby,
                   ORDERED,
                   ORDERED, that
                            that New
                                 New York
                                     York City School Construction
                                          City School              Authority's motion
                                                      Construction Authority's        (Motion Seq.
                                                                               motion (Motion
           1) to dismiss
                 dismiss Goldstein,
                         Goldstein, Rikon,
                                    Rikon, Rikon,   Levi, P.C.'s
                                           Rikon, & Levi,                 Complaint pursuant
                                                                 Verified Complaint
                                                          P.C.'s Verified                       CPLR SS
                                                                                    pursuant to CPLR §§
           3211(a)(l)
           321             (a)(7) is denied.
               l(a)(I) and (a)(7)    denied.
                   This
                   This constitutes
                        constitutes the decision and
                                    the decision           of the
                                                     order of
                                                 and order        court.
                                                              the court.

                                                                       Hon. I
                                                                       Hon.      r'        J.S.C.
                                                                                    Joseph J.S.C.
                                                                                 r· Joseph
                                                                              Ho . ngrid Joseph
                                                                       ,..,.. Ho         Joseph
                                                                        Supreme Court
                                                                        Supreme       Justice
                                                                                Court Justice

                                                                 10

                                                             10 of 10
[* 10]