12 Cited authorities

  1. Tewari v. Tsoutsouras

    75 N.Y.2d 1 (N.Y. 1989)   Cited 154 times
    In Tewari, applicable law did not expressly provide otherwise, since, as then-Judge Kaye noted in her concurrence, the underlying statute at issue (CPLR 3406 [a]) did "not plainly authorize dismissal" for failure to meet the relevant deadline (75 NY2d at 13-14).
  2. Contelmo's Sand Gravel v. J J Milano

    96 A.D.2d 1090 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)   Cited 54 times
    In Contelmo's Sand Gravel v J J Milano (96 A.D.2d 1090), the court concluded that a description which read "on West side of Wheeler Hill Road, Town of Wappinger, Dutchess County, New York" was both inaccurate and insufficient thus rendering the lien invalid.
  3. Gallo Brothers Construction v. Peccolo

    281 A.D.2d 811 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 13 times

    March 15, 2001. Cross appeals from an order of the Supreme Court (Demarest, J.), entered February 15, 2000 in St. Lawrence County, which, inter alia, granted plaintiff's motion to amend its complaint, denied plaintiff's motion for an order nunc pro tunc to extend the lis pendens and denied defendant Mary Peccolo's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against her. Melvin Melvin L.L.P. (Lisa M. Lambert of counsel), Syracuse, for respondent-appellant. Durr, Riley, Nortz King (Scott R

  4. Makovic v. Aigbogun

    41 A.D.3d 342 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 3 times

    June 28, 2007. Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mark Friedlander, J.), entered January 23, 2007, which granted plaintiffs motion to extend a notice of pendency nunc pro tunc, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Before: Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Marlow, Buckley and Malone, JJ. Plaintiff moved to extend the notice of pendency by order to show cause filed about 2½ months before the notice of pendency was due to expire. The motion was granted by order signed and entered about a month after the notice

  5. Kellett's Well Boring v. City of New York

    292 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)   Cited 3 times

    199-200-201 March 7, 2002. Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis York, J.), entered on or about December 21, 1998, which denied the motion of the defendant in Action No. 1, The City of New York, to dismiss, unanimously reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant City of New York dismissing the complaint as against it in Action No. 1. Appeal from order, same court (Joan Madden, J.), entered January

  6. Binghamton Masonic Temple, Inc. v. Armor Elevator Co.

    186 A.D.2d 338 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)   Cited 6 times

    September 24, 1992 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Broome County (Smyk, J.). At issue in this case are two court orders continuing respondent's mechanic's lien which were granted within the one-year time period set forth in Lien Law § 17, but which were not actually filed with the County Clerk within that time period. The first extension was obtained in 1987 and is governed by Lien Law former § 17 (as amended by L 1970, ch 696), while the second extension at issue was obtained in 1989 and is governed

  7. Zoerb and Co., Inc. v. Young Fire Equip. Co.

    134 A.D.2d 826 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)   Cited 2 times

    November 10, 1987 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Ostrowski, J. Present — Dillon, P.J., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ. Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion granted. Memorandum: It is clear from the record submitted on this appeal that the mechanic's lien filed by plaintiff expired, at the latest, on April 1, 1983 without further timely continuation by court order. Section 17 Lien of the Lien Law provides in part: "No lien specified in this article shall be

  8. Carassavas v. New York State Department of Social Services

    90 A.D.2d 630 (N.Y. App. Div. 1982)   Cited 6 times

    October 21, 1982 Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Cerrito, J.), entered April 9, 1981 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner's application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to annul a determination of respondent denying petitioner's request for an administrative hearing. In June, 1980, petitioner, a physician, was convicted of two felonies, grand larceny in the third degree and offering a false instrument for filing. Both convictions arose from his activity

  9. Matter of Lycee Francais v. Calagna

    26 Misc. 2d 374 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1960)   Cited 18 times
    In Matter of Lycee Francais de N.Y. v Calagna (26 Misc.2d 374 [Sup Ct, N Y County 1960]) the court stated concerning renewal of lien: "The statute does not require notice.
  10. Matter of Powers v. Foley

    25 A.D.2d 525 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)   Cited 10 times

    February 7, 1966 In a proceeding under article 78 of the CPLR to direct the Board of Standards and Appeals of the City of New York to accept and act on petitioner's application, retroactive to December 15, 1964, for an extension of time to complete the construction of a building, and to accept any further applications for similar extensions, the board appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated July 7, 1965, which granted the petition. Judgment reversed on the law, without costs