throbber
FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05312018 04:30 PM
`NYSC 3F DOC. NO.
`91
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`
`IND
`EX NO.
`100930/2015
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`
` VYSC
`
` flIV flD
` 3F:
`
`05/23/2018
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`
`Exhibit 14
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`: 27
`12
`dLERit™Ò3f2472017
`1FIEED:""RTC1tROND"COUNTT
`Ply
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`NYSCEF
`52
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`100930/2015
`NO.
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`RECEIVED
`03/24/2017
`NYSCEF:
`c5
`
`.
`
`OF THE
`COURT
`SUPREME
`OF RICHMOND
`COUNTY
`-------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`
`STATE
`
`OF NEW YORK
`
`ADRIA
`
`INFRASTRUCTURE,
`
`LLC,
`
`Plaintif
`
`-against-
`
`JACOB'S
`INC.,
`FACILITIES,
`INC.,
`HENICK-LANE,
`OF NEW YORK,
`AUTHORITY
`DORMITORY
`STATE
`CASUALTY
`TRAVELERS
`ELECTRICAL
`LEVEST
`CORP.,
`OF AMERICA
`COMPANY
`AND SURETY
`DOES 1-10,
`JOHN
`
`and
`
`Defendants,
`-------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`ELECTRICAL
`
`CORPORATION,
`
`LEVEST
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`-against-
`
`OF NEW YORK,
`- STATE
`AUTHORITY
`INC.,
`HENICK-LANE,
`INC.,
`CONTROLS,
`INSURANCE
`MUTUAL
`and any other
`COMPANY,
`DOES
`and JOHN
`1-10,
`Lienholders,
`-------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`numbered
`1 to 12 were
`papers
`The
`
`DORMITORY
`JOHNSON
`LIBERTY
`
`following
`
`fully
`
`submitted
`
`DCM Part 4
`
`Present:
`Kim Dollard
`Hon.
`
`DECISION
`
`AND ORDER
`
`Action
`Index
`Motion
`
`I
`
`No.
`No.
`Nos.
`
`100930/15
`2566-002
`2592-003
`2800-004
`3877-005
`
`Action
`Index
`
`No.
`No.
`
`2
`
`150364/16
`
`on the
`
`30th
`
`day
`
`of September,
`
`2016:
`
`Pages
`Numbered
`
`of Motion
`Notice
`by Defendant
`Henick-Lane,
`of Law
`and Memorandum
`13, 2016).........................................................................................1
`(dated
`June
`
`to Compel
`
`Disclosure
`Inc, with
`
`Supporting
`
`Papers,
`
`Exhibits
`
`of Cross
`Notice
`by Defendant
`(dated
`June
`
`Motion
`
`to Consolidate
`and Exhibits
`Papers
`Inc, with
`Henick-Lane,
`Supporting
`17, 2016).........................................................................................2
`
`for Partial
`
`of Cross Motion
`Notice
`by Defendant
`with
`Supporting
`(dated
`June
`29,
`
`Judgment
`Summary
`- State
`of New York,
`Authority
`Dormitory
`of Law
`and Memorandum
`Exhibits
`Papers,
`2016).........................................................................................3
`
`1 of
`
`10
`
`c
`
`c>
`
`D
`
`D
`C3
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`1FEED:""RTCHNONU"COUNTT
`: 27
`12
`dLERit™Ò3f2472017
`Ply
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`NYSCEF
`52
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`100930/2015
`NO.
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`03/24/2017
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`
`of Damjan
`
`Stanivukovic
`
`to Cross Motion
`Affidavit
`and Exhibits
`Papers
`with
`for Partial
`Judgment,
`Supporting
`Summary
`4, 2016).......................................................................................4
`August
`(dated
`
`in Opposition
`
`.
`
`in Opposition
`Affirmation
`Adria
`by Plaintiff
`and Memorandum
`August
`(dated
`
`to Cross Motion
`with
`
`LLC,
`
`for Partial
`
`Supporting
`
`Summary
`Papers,
`
`Judgment
`Exhibits
`
`Infrastructure,
`of Law
`8, 2016).......................................................................................5
`
`Affirmation
`(dated
`August
`
`of
`
`Esq.
`John M. Rondello,
`8, 2016).......................................................................................6
`
`Memorandum
`
`Reply
`for Partial
`Summary
`of New York
`State
`September
`(dated
`
`of Law
`Judgment
`
`Support
`in Further
`by Defendant
`
`of Cross Motion
`
`Dormitory
`
`Authority
`
`-
`
`6, 2016)..................................................................................7
`
`.6
`
`.7
`
`.8
`
`of Cross Motion
`Notice
`Adria
`by Plaintiff
`and Memorandum
`September
`(dated
`
`to Amend
`
`of Lien
`
`Notice
`with
`
`LLC,
`
`Supporting
`
`Papers,
`
`Exhibits
`
`Infrastructure,
`of Law
`19, 2016)................................................................................8
`
`Affirmation
`by Defendants
`September
`(dated
`
`to Consolidate
`to Motion
`in Opposition
`Insurance
`Mutual
`and
`Inc
`Johnson
`Controls,
`Liberty
`22, 2016).................................................................................9
`
`Company
`
`to Motion
`in Opposition
`Affirmation
`Corporation
`Levest
`Electric
`by Plaintiff
`23, 2016).................................................................................10
`September
`(dated
`
`to Consolidate
`
`in Opposition
`
`to Motion
`Affirmation
`Inc
`by Defendant
`Henick-Lane,
`27, 2016).................................................................................11
`September
`(dated
`
`to Amend
`
`Notice
`
`of Lien
`
`in Reply
`Affirmation
`Inc
`by Defendant
`Henick-Lane,
`2016).................................................................................12
`September
`(dated
`28,
`
`Upon
`
`the foregoing
`
`papers,
`
`the motion
`
`(No.
`
`2566-002)
`
`and cross motion
`
`(No.
`
`2592-003)
`
`of
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`Inc
`
`(hereinafter
`
`"Henick-Lane"
`"Henick-Lane")
`
`for
`
`(1)
`
`consolidation
`
`and
`
`(2)
`
`to compel
`
`discovery
`
`are denied;
`
`the cross motion
`
`(No.
`
`2800-004)
`
`by defendant
`
`Dormitory
`
`Authority
`
`- State
`
`of
`
`2
`
`2
`
`of
`
`10
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`dLERK"03
`IFIIith:^™RTCHRONIFCOUNTT
`: 27
`12
`2017
`247
`PM)
`NYSCEF
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`DOC.
`NO.
`52
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`NO.
`100930/2015
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`03/24/2017
`
`New York
`
`(hereinafter
`
`"DASNY")
`
`for partial
`
`summary
`
`judgment
`
`is granted;
`
`as is the cross motion
`
`(No.
`
`3877-005)
`
`by plaintiff
`
`Adria
`
`Infrastructure,
`
`LLC
`
`(hereinafter
`
`"Adria")
`
`for
`
`leave
`
`to amend
`
`its
`
`notice
`
`ol'
`of
`
`lien.
`
`To the extent
`
`relevant,
`
`these
`
`actions
`
`arise
`
`from "work
`
`on a public
`
`improvement
`
`project
`
`for
`
`the reconstruction
`
`of a portion
`
`of
`
`[the]
`
`Staten
`
`Island
`
`Courthouse"
`
`(see Verified
`
`Complaint
`
`[Adria
`
`8).
`
`Insofar
`
`defendant
`
`as owner
`
`ofthe
`
`above
`
`project,
`
`entered
`
`into
`
`action],
`
`para
`
`as it appears,
`
`DASNY,
`
`an agreement
`
`on September
`
`17, 2009,
`
`hiring
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`to serve
`
`as general
`
`contractor
`
`in connection
`
`with
`
`the
`
`reconstruction
`
`(id.
`
`at 33-36;
`
`see also
`
`Defendant
`
`DASNY's
`
`Exhibit
`
`"A").
`
`Defendant
`
`Jacob's
`
`Facilities,
`
`Inc
`
`(hereinafter
`
`"JFI")
`
`was
`
`subsequently
`
`hired
`
`by DASNY
`
`to serve
`
`as
`
`construction
`
`manager
`
`(id.
`
`at 33-36).
`
`The
`
`complaint
`
`alleges
`
`that
`
`in pursuance
`
`ofits
`
`contract
`
`with DASNY,
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`purchase
`
`with
`
`plaintiff/subcontractor
`
`on or about
`
`placed
`
`two
`
`separate
`
`orders
`
`Adria
`
`January
`
`29, 2010,
`
`for materials
`
`and services
`
`required
`
`to complete
`
`the reconstruction.
`
`It
`
`is undisputed
`
`that
`
`one of
`
`these
`
`purchase
`
`orders
`
`obligated
`
`Adria
`
`to "furnish
`
`and
`
`install
`
`pipe
`
`fittings"
`
`(id.
`
`at 9, 12), while
`
`the other
`
`obligated
`
`Adria
`
`to "provide...
`
`steamfitt[ers]"
`frtt[ers]"
`steam
`
`(id.
`
`at 39, 42).
`
`It
`
`is further
`
`alleged
`
`that
`
`the total
`
`amount
`
`due and owing
`
`under
`
`the first
`
`of
`
`these
`
`orders
`
`was
`
`the sum of $742,
`
`651.12
`
`(id.
`
`at 9, 12), with
`
`regard
`
`filed
`
`Under
`
`to which
`
`Adria
`
`a statutory
`
`"Notice
`
`Mechanics
`
`Lien
`
`Law[§l
`
`2]
`
`for Account
`
`of Public
`
`Improvements"
`
`on December
`
`6, 2013
`
`(id.
`
`at 14; see also Defendant
`
`DASNY's
`
`Exhibit
`
`"E").
`
`A like
`
`lien
`
`in the
`
`sum of $4,180,706.72
`
`referable
`
`to
`
`the
`
`second
`
`purchase
`
`order
`
`was
`
`filed
`
`on March
`
`31,
`
`2015
`
`(id.
`
`at 39, 42,
`
`44;
`
`see also Defendant
`
`DASNY's
`
`Exhibit
`
`"G").'
`
`' PursuanttoLien
`owned
`property
`file
`a notice
`of
`
`real
`
`may
`
`Law
`a subcontractor
`§12,
`or a public
`by the state
`corporation,
`lien with
`the head
`of
`the department
`
`which
`
`furnishes
`a "public
`or bureau
`
`3
`
`3
`
`of
`
`10
`
`or materials
`labor
`improvement"
`(Lien
`of such
`
`in improving
`Law §2[7]),
`
`having
`
`charge
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`: 27
`12
`dLERit™Ò3fŽ472017
`1FIEED:""RTCHNOND"COUN'1T
`Ply
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`NYSCEF
`52
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`100930/2015
`NO.
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`03/24/2017
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`
`Plaintiff
`
`Adria
`
`subsequently
`
`commenced
`
`this
`
`action
`
`to foreclose
`
`upon
`
`both
`
`liens
`
`by the filing
`
`-
`
`of a Summons
`
`and Verified
`
`Complaint
`
`on or about
`
`July
`
`23, 2015
`
`(see Defendant
`
`DASNY's
`
`Exhibit
`
`"B").
`
`On
`
`or
`
`about
`
`September
`
`9, 2015,
`
`plaintiff
`
`filed
`
`an Amended
`
`Complaint
`
`adding
`
`Levest
`
`Electrical
`
`Corp
`
`(hereinafter
`
`"Levest")
`
`as a party
`
`which
`
`had also
`
`filed
`
`a lien
`
`against
`
`the project
`
`(see
`
`Defendant
`
`DASNY's
`
`Exhibit
`
`"C")
`
`as provided
`
`in Lien
`
`Law
`
`§44.
`
`In addition
`
`to foreclosure,
`
`the
`
`amended
`
`complaint
`
`asserted
`
`additional
`
`causes
`
`of actions
`
`against
`
`Henick-Lane,
`
`DASNY
`
`and JFI
`
`for
`
`(1) unjust
`
`enrichment
`
`and
`
`(2)
`
`in quantum
`
`meruit
`
`(id.).
`
`On
`
`or about
`
`March
`
`25,
`
`2016,
`
`defendant
`
`Levest
`
`filed
`
`a separate
`
`action
`
`to foreclose
`
`on
`
`its
`
`mechanics'
`mechanics'
`
`due
`
`of
`
`at
`
`least
`
`$167,970.93
`
`(see Defendant
`
`Henick-Lane's
`
`lien,
`
`alleging
`
`a balance
`
`Exhibit
`
`"B").
`
`To the extent
`
`relevant,
`
`Levest
`
`claimed
`
`to have
`
`performed
`
`work
`
`on the subject
`
`project
`
`pursuant
`
`to a subcontract
`
`entered
`
`into
`
`in February
`
`of 2012
`
`with
`
`defendant
`
`Johnson
`
`Controls,
`
`Inc
`
`(hereinafter
`
`"
`
`JCI"),
`
`another
`
`subcontractor
`
`hired
`
`by
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`(see
`
`Defendant
`
`DASNY's
`
`Exhibit
`
`"H").
`
`Among
`
`the motions
`
`presently
`
`before
`
`the Court
`
`is a motion
`
`to consolidate
`
`the Adria
`
`action
`
`with
`
`the
`
`Levest
`
`action
`
`against
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane,
`
`et al.
`
`of
`
`2002]).
`shall
`
`the Legislature
`
`requirements,
`improvements.
`
`It
`
`for
`
`public
`
`officer
`
`for
`
`the
`created
`
`validity
`two
`
`of a
`separate
`
`of private
`
`of note
`
`that
`
`the
`to restrict
`the rights
`that City-owned
`
`of
`
`creditors
`
`of City-owned
`
`property
`
`is inalienable
`
`properties,
`(id.).
`
`consistent
`
`with
`
`4
`
`4
`
`of
`
`10
`
`or demolition
`or other
`
`construction
`public
`corporation,
`funds
`or corporate
`of New
`v. City
`York,
`"substantial
`compliance
`Law
`§23).
`As
`
`(Lien
`categories
`
`property,
`subdivision
`
`of
`
`and
`
`of
`
`and withthecomptroller
`charged
`officer
`or person
`under
`to the contract
`applicable
`174 [1" Dept
`294 AD2d
`173,
`provision
`its several
`with
`is applicable
`herein,
`two
`separate
`notice
`with
`liens,
`as here,
`the other,
`mechanics'
`mechanics'
`liens
`
`in this manner
`
`was
`
`the
`of
`the financial
`or with
`the state
`the state
`with
`the custody
`of
`and disbursement
`(see EMC Iron Works
`which
`is made
`the claim
`further
`Lien
`Law
`provides
`that
`The
`lien"
`be sufficient
`has explicitly
`one
`for
`the improvement
`is worthy
`intended
`
`apparently
`the
`unique
`
`circumstance
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`i'ILED:^™RTCHNONU"COUNTT
`2017
`: 27
`12
`CLERK"037
`247
`PN|
`NYSCEF
`DOC.
`NO.
`52
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`NO.
`100930/2015
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`03/24/2017
`
`A motion
`
`to consolidate
`
`two
`
`or more
`
`actions
`
`rests within
`
`the
`
`sound
`
`discretion
`
`of
`
`the court
`
`.
`
`(see CPLR 602;
`
`American
`
`Home
`
`Mtge
`
`Servicing,
`.Servicing,
`
`Inc
`
`v. Sharrocks,
`
`92 AD3d
`
`620,
`
`622
`
`[2"d Dept
`
`2012]).
`
`Nevertheless,
`
`where
`
`common
`
`questions
`
`of
`
`law or
`
`fact
`
`exist,
`
`consolidation
`
`is warranted
`
`unless
`
`the
`
`opposing
`
`party
`
`demonstrates
`
`prejudice
`
`to a substantial
`
`right
`
`(id.).
`
`Here,
`
`both
`
`actions
`
`involve
`
`claims
`
`by
`
`lienors
`
`for
`
`labor
`
`and materials
`
`furnished
`
`to the
`
`same
`
`project.
`
`However,
`
`it
`
`is
`
`to
`
`the
`
`undisputed
`
`that
`
`the
`
`purchase
`
`agreements
`
`between
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`and
`
`Adria
`
`are
`
`unrelated
`
`contract
`
`between
`
`the
`
`former
`
`and
`
`JCI which,
`
`in turn,
`
`entered
`
`into
`
`the
`
`subcontract
`
`with
`
`Levest.
`
`Moreover,
`
`while
`
`Adria
`
`is asserting
`
`various
`
`claims
`
`against
`
`multiple
`
`defendants,
`
`Levest
`
`is only
`
`seeking
`
`to foreclose
`
`upon
`
`the surety
`
`bond
`
`posted
`
`by defendant
`
`Henick-Lane.
`
`Accordingly,
`
`the two
`
`actions
`
`do not
`
`concern
`
`the same
`
`parties
`
`or
`
`involve
`
`common
`
`questions
`
`of
`
`law and
`
`fact
`
`[2nd Dept
`
`2013]).
`
`the motion
`
`(cf
`
`Sconov.
`
`denied.2
`
`Kodsi,
`
`102 AD3d
`
`947,
`
`948
`
`Hence,
`
`to
`
`consolidate
`
`is
`
`Turning
`
`to its
`
`cross motion
`
`for
`
`partial
`
`summary
`
`judgment,
`
`defendant
`
`DASNY
`
`seeks
`
`to
`
`dismiss
`
`the
`
`third,
`
`fourth
`
`and
`
`fifth
`
`causes
`
`of action
`
`in plaintiff's
`
`Amended
`
`Verified
`
`Complaint.
`
`support,
`
`DASNY
`
`contends,
`
`inter
`
`alia,
`
`that
`
`it
`
`is no
`
`longer
`
`a proper
`
`party
`
`to
`
`the
`
`foreclosure
`
`In
`
`of
`
`plaintiff's
`
`December
`
`2013
`
`lien,
`
`as sought
`
`in its fifth
`
`cause
`
`of action.
`
`In this
`
`regard,
`
`it
`
`is undisputed
`
`that
`
`the
`
`lien
`
`filed
`
`plaintiff
`
`by
`
`on December
`
`12,
`
`2013
`
`in the
`
`amount
`
`of
`
`$742,651.12
`
`has
`
`been
`
`discharged
`
`as a result
`
`of
`
`the
`
`posting
`
`of a undertaking
`
`in the amount
`
`of $816,916.23
`
`by defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`on January
`
`21, 2014
`
`(see Affirmation
`
`of John M. Rondello,
`
`Jr., Esq.
`
`dated
`
`September
`
`19, 2016,
`
`paras
`
`9-10;
`
`annexed
`
`Exhibit
`
`"C"
`
`"Discharge
`
`of Lien";
`
`see also
`
`Affirmation
`
`of Carol
`
`A.
`
`Sigmond,
`
`Esq.,
`
`para
`
`3). Pursuant
`
`to Lien
`
`Law §21(5),
`
`a lien against
`
`the amount
`
`due or
`
`to become
`
`due
`
`to compel
`
`2The
`
`exchange
`subsequent
`academic.
`
`discovery
`
`of discovery
`
`materials
`
`has rendered
`
`Henick-Lane's
`
`cross motion
`
`5
`
`5
`
`of
`
`10
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`ML1th:^™kTCIBibNtrt0UNTT
`2017
`: 27
`12
`CLERk"03jiit7
`Ply
`NYSCEF
`DOC.
`NO.
`52
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`NO.
`100930/2015
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`03/24/2017
`
`a contractor
`
`from the
`
`state
`
`or a public
`
`corporation
`
`for
`
`the
`
`construction
`
`or demolition
`
`of
`
`a public
`
`.
`
`improvement
`
`may
`
`be discharged
`
`either
`
`before
`
`or after
`
`the beginning
`
`of an action
`
`by a contractor
`
`or
`
`subcontractor
`
`executing
`
`a bond
`
`or undertaking
`
`in an amount
`
`equal
`
`to one hundred
`
`and ten percent
`
`of
`
`such
`
`lien conditioned
`
`for
`
`the payment
`
`of any judgment
`
`which
`
`may
`
`be recovered
`
`in an action
`
`to enforce
`
`the lien
`
`(cf
`
`Lien
`
`Law
`
`§37[7]);
`
`see Norden
`
`Elec
`
`v.
`
`Ideal
`
`Elec
`
`Supply
`
`Corp,
`
`154 AD2d
`
`580,
`
`581).
`
`...
`
`The
`
`law
`
`is well
`
`settled
`
`that
`
`"[u]pon
`
`the
`
`filing
`
`of
`
`a discharge
`
`bond[,]
`
`the
`
`public
`
`improvement
`
`lien
`
`previously
`
`filed
`
`attaches
`
`to the bond,
`
`which
`
`is substituted
`
`for
`
`the liened
`
`
`
`property"property"
`
`(Tri-City
`
`Electric
`
`Co
`
`v. People,
`
`63 NY2d
`
`969,
`
`971).
`
`IIowever,
`
`since
`
`city-owned
`
`properties
`
`are
`
`inalienable
`
`under
`
`New
`
`York
`
`City
`
`Charter
`
`§383,
`
`the
`
`"property"
`
`to which
`
`a public
`
`improvement
`
`lien
`
`attaches,
`
`and which
`
`secures
`
`the creditor's
`
`interest
`
`payment,
`
`is not
`
`the City's
`
`real
`
`initially
`
`in obtaining
`
`property,
`
`as it
`
`is in the case of privately
`
`owned
`
`realty;
`
`rather,
`
`it
`
`is the moneys
`
`of
`
`the state
`
`or of such
`
`public
`
`corporation
`
`responsible
`
`for
`
`the construction
`
`or demolition
`
`of such
`
`improvements
`
`(EMC Iron
`
`Works
`
`v. City
`
`of New
`
`York,
`
`294 AD2d
`
`173,
`
`174;
`
`see Lien
`
`Law
`
`§5).3
`
`Remedial
`
`in nature,
`
`New York's
`
`lien
`
`law entitled
`
`to a liberal
`
`construction
`
`designed
`
`to carry
`
`out
`
`the
`
`purpose
`
`of
`
`its enactment
`
`(see Riverhead
`
`Transit
`
`Mix
`
`Corp
`
`v. Walsh
`
`Constr.
`
`Co
`
`[In
`
`re
`
`1995
`
`Bankr.
`
`LEXIS
`
`2166).
`
`Riverhead
`
`Transit
`
`Mix Corp]),
`
`Nevertheless,
`
`even
`
`the most
`
`liberal
`
`of
`
`constructions
`
`is not without
`
`limit,
`
`and
`
`does
`
`authorize
`
`subsequent
`
`judicial
`
`expansion
`
`to include
`
`Authorities
`corporate
`(Pub
`Auth
`re Riverhead
`
`Authority
`benefit
`
`the State
`of
`corporation"
`
`Transit
`
`LEXIS
`
`Mix Corp
`2166
`at
`*20
`
`Bankr.
`
`of New
`with
`the
`v.
`
`(Bankr.
`
`the Dormitory
`Law defines
`a public
`and politic
`constituting
`Law §§l 677,
`see Riverhead
`1678;
`Mix Corp)),
`Transit
`1995
`"is
`a corporation
`the state,
`(Gen
`
`3NewYork'sPublic
`as "a body
`(DASNY)
`sued"
`"to
`sue and be
`Constr.
`Co [In
`A public
`improvement
`or other
`
`York
`power
`Walsh
`SDNY
`public
`
`of
`
`this
`
`1995).
`
`states,
`v. Walsh
`Constr.
`SDNY
`
`benefit
`corporation
`or partly
`wholly
`or
`to the people
`
`within
`thereof'
`
`organized
`the profits
`
`from which
`
`Constr
`
`Law
`
`§66[4];
`1995
`
`to construct
`
`or operate
`inure
`to the benefit
`see Riverhead
`Transit
`Bankr.
`LEXIS
`
`a
`
`at
`
`2166
`
`Mix
`
`*l9
`
`Corp
`(Bankr.
`
`1995).
`
`Corp]),
`
`Co [In
`
`re Riverhead
`
`Transit
`
`Mix
`
`6
`
`6
`
`of
`
`10
`
`

`


`
`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`: 27
`12
`'Z017
`fKWiBFFEl
`)äHiifBaiiMWii0iHi3ï•RiiK•F•IúI3ñK•Wf3i
`Ply
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`NYSCEF
`52
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`100930/2015
`NO.
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`03/24/2017
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`
`matters
`
`beyond
`
`those
`
`expressly
`
`stated
`
`by the
`
`legislature.
`
`.
`
`Lien
`
`Law
`
`§44
`
`provides,
`
`in pertinent
`
`part,
`
`that
`
`in an action
`
`to enforce
`
`a lien
`
`against
`
`real
`
`property
`
`or a public
`
`improvement
`
`(whichever
`
`is warranted),
`
`all persons
`
`appearing
`
`to be the owners
`
`thereof
`
`must
`
`be joined
`
`as defendants,
`
`except
`
`where
`
`a bond
`
`has been
`
`filed
`
`discharging
`
`the lien
`
`(Lien
`
`Law
`
`§§21[5];
`
`37[7]).
`
`Under
`
`such
`
`circumstances,
`
`the
`
`owners
`
`cease
`
`to be necessary
`
`parties,
`
`as the
`
`fisc
`
`for
`
`be attached
`
`and
`
`bond
`
`has replaced
`
`the real
`
`property
`
`or public
`
`as security
`
`the debt,
`
`and may
`
`attacked
`
`(see
`
`Lien
`
`Law
`
`§5 ; Bryant
`
`Equip
`
`Corp
`
`v. A-1 Moore
`
`Contr
`
`Corp,
`
`51 AD2d
`
`792 ; see also
`
`Riverhead
`
`Transit
`
`Mix Corp
`
`v. Walsh
`
`Constr.
`
`Co [In
`
`re Riverhead
`
`Transit
`
`Mix Corp]),
`
`1995 Bankr.
`
`LEXIS
`
`2166
`
`at *19
`
`(Bankr.
`
`SDNY
`
`1995;
`
`ef Martirano
`
`Constr
`
`Corp
`
`v. Briar
`
`Contr
`
`Corp,
`
`104 AD2d
`
`1028).
`
`Here,
`
`it
`
`is undisputed
`
`that
`
`the lien
`
`filed
`
`by plaintiff
`
`in December
`
`of
`
`2013
`
`has been
`
`discharged
`
`posted
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`of 2014.
`
`as a result
`
`of
`
`the undertaking
`
`by defendant
`
`in January
`
`Accordingly,
`
`since
`
`this matter
`
`involves
`
`sums
`
`alleged
`
`to be due for
`
`labor
`
`and materials
`
`on a public
`
`improvement,
`
`the
`
`action
`
`to foreclose
`
`plaintiff's
`
`lien
`
`(its
`
`fifth
`
`cause
`
`of action)
`
`is entitled
`
`to dismissal
`
`as against
`
`DASNY.
`
`In support
`
`of
`
`the
`
`balance
`
`of
`
`its motion,
`
`is.,
`
`for
`
`summary
`
`judgment
`
`dismissing
`
`plaintiff's
`
`third
`
`and
`
`fourth
`
`causes
`
`of action,
`
`DASNY
`
`maintains
`
`that
`
`it contracted
`
`solely
`
`with
`
`its co-defendant,
`
`and
`
`that
`
`in
`
`the
`
`absence
`
`of
`
`a
`
`Henick-Lane,
`
`rather
`
`than
`
`the
`
`plaintiff/subcontractor,
`
`privity,
`
`subcontractor
`
`cannot
`
`assert
`
`a claim
`
`for
`
`unjust
`
`enrichment
`
`or
`
`in quantum
`
`meruit
`
`against
`
`it.
`
`It
`
`is well
`
`settled
`
`that
`
`a property
`
`owner
`
`who
`
`hires
`
`a general
`
`contractor
`
`to perform
`
`certain
`
`work
`
`does
`
`not
`
`become
`
`liable
`
`to a
`
`subcontractor
`
`engaged
`
`by
`
`the
`
`latter
`
`on the
`
`theory
`
`of quasi
`
`contract,
`
`unless
`
`it expressly
`
`consents
`
`to pay
`
`for
`
`the subcontractor's
`
`performance
`
`(see Sears
`
`Ready Mix,
`
`Ltd
`
`7
`
`7
`
`of
`
`10
`
`

`

`."Wh"COUNTT
`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`CLERK
`2477017
`: 27
`12
`"037
`PM)
`NYSCEF
`DOC.
`NO.
`52
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`NO.
`100930/2015
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`03/24/2017
`
`v. Lighthouse
`
`Mar,
`
`Inc,
`
`127 AD3d
`
`845,
`
`846
`
`[2nd Dept
`
`2015]).
`
`Moreover,
`
`"[t]he
`
`mere
`
`fact
`
`that
`
`the
`
`.
`
`[owner
`
`has]
`
`consented
`
`to the
`
`improvements
`
`and
`
`received
`
`some
`
`benefit
`
`from the
`
`[subcontractor's]
`
`activities
`
`is insufficient
`
`to recover
`
`on such
`
`a theory;
`
`the
`
`[subcontractor]
`
`must
`
`also
`
`show
`
`that
`
`it was
`
`working
`
`for
`
`the
`
`[owner]
`
`when
`
`it performed
`
`its work,
`
`resulting
`
`in unjust
`
`enrichment"
`enrichment"
`
`(id.
`
`at 846
`
`[internal
`
`quotation
`
`marks
`
`omitted]).
`
`Accordingly,
`
`"a subcontractor
`
`not
`
`assert
`
`a
`
`[generally]
`
`may
`
`cause
`
`of action
`
`to recover
`
`damages
`
`for
`
`breach
`
`of
`
`contract
`
`against
`
`a party
`
`with
`
`whom it
`
`is not
`
`in
`
`privity"
`
`(see Vertical
`
`Progression,
`
`Inc
`
`v. Canyon
`
`Johnson
`
`Urban
`
`Funds,
`
`126 AD3d
`
`784,
`
`786).
`
`4
`
`In opposition
`
`to DASNY's
`
`motion
`
`for summary
`
`judgment,
`
`Damjan
`
`Stanivukovie,
`
`a member
`
`of Adria,
`
`attests
`
`that
`
`"the
`
`Project
`
`was
`
`substantially
`
`delayed
`
`through
`
`[DASNY's]
`
`mismanagement
`
`and owner
`
`directed
`
`delay
`
`and
`
`extensions"
`
`(see Affidavit
`
`of Damjan
`
`Stanivukovic,
`
`paras
`
`3, 5). More
`
`and
`
`communicate
`
`between
`
`specifically,
`
`it
`
`is claimed
`
`that
`
`"DASNY
`
`failed
`
`to properly
`
`coordinate
`
`itself,
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`and
`
`[JFI],
`
`which
`
`resulted
`
`in [a]
`
`failure
`
`to act and respond
`
`[in a timely
`
`manner]
`
`to myriad...
`
`issue[sJ
`
`thus
`
`causing
`
`further
`
`delays
`
`in the
`
`Project"
`
`(id.
`
`at 5).
`
`In the opinion
`
`of
`
`this Court,
`
`Adria's
`
`opposition
`
`is unresponsive
`
`and,
`
`therefore,
`
`insufficient
`
`to raise
`
`a triable
`
`issue
`
`as to DASNY's
`
`liability
`
`to plaintiff.
`
`As a result,
`
`the Court
`
`finds
`
`that Adria
`
`has failed
`
`to demonstrate
`
`that
`
`the moving
`
`defendant
`
`took
`
`any action
`
`to induce
`
`plaintiffto
`
`believe
`
`that
`
`services.
`
`it would
`
`pay
`
`for plaintiff's
`
`To the contrary,
`
`all of DASNY's
`
`business
`
`transactions
`
`cited
`
`by
`
`plaintiff
`
`appear
`
`to have
`
`involved
`
`just
`
`the movant
`
`and Henick-Lane.
`
`It
`
`is well
`
`established
`
`that
`
`there
`
`can be no claim
`
`of unjust
`
`enrichment
`
`in the absence
`
`of any evidence
`
`of a relationship
`
`the parties
`
`that
`
`4Nevertheless.
`
`a subcontractor
`
`can sometimes
`
`prevail
`
`on a cause
`
`against
`
`an
`
`g.,
`
`owner
`
`for,
`subcontractor
`them"
`between
`
`786).
`
`unjust
`
`enrichment,
`
`but
`
`only
`an obligation
`
`imposing
`justify
`(see Vertical
`
`Progression,
`
`"where
`
`direct
`
`dealings
`
`upon
`the owner
`v. Canyon
`
`despite
`Johnson
`
`Inc
`
`8
`
`8
`
`of
`
`10
`
`of action
`between
`the owner
`and the
`lack
`of privity
`126 AD3d
`
`the initial
`Urban
`
`Funds,
`
`at
`
`

`

`.
`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`"COUNTT
`: 27
`12
`2'017
`dLERK"037
`247
`Ply
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`NYSCEF
`52
`NO.
`DOC.
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`NO.
`100930/2015
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`RECEIVED
`03/24/2017
`NYSCEF:
`
`causes
`
`plaintiff's
`
`reliance
`
`or
`
`inducement
`
`to believe
`
`that
`
`a defendant
`
`would
`
`pay
`
`for
`
`its services
`
`(see
`
`JP Plumbing
`
`Corp
`
`v. Born
`
`to Build
`
`Constr
`
`Corp,
`
`137 AD3d
`
`976,
`
`977).
`
`Clearly,
`
`none
`
`is present
`
`here.
`
`Accordingly,
`
`that
`
`branch
`
`of DASNY's
`
`motion
`
`which
`
`is
`
`for
`
`partial
`
`summary
`
`judgment
`
`dismissing
`
`plaintiff's
`
`third
`
`(unjust
`
`enrichment)
`
`and fourth
`
`(quantum
`
`meruit)
`
`causes
`
`ofaction
`
`against
`
`it
`
`is granted,
`
`as well.
`
`its notice
`
`of
`
`lien
`
`nunc
`
`pro
`
`tune
`
`in
`
`As
`
`for
`
`plaintiff
`
`Adria's
`
`cross motion
`
`for
`
`leave
`
`to amend
`
`order
`
`to reduce
`
`the amount
`
`thereof
`
`from
`
`$4,180,706.72
`
`to $2,962,489.37,
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`contends
`
`that while
`
`the amendment
`
`may
`
`be allowed,
`
`the question
`
`of plaintiff's
`
`willful
`
`exaggeration
`
`of
`
`its lien
`
`survives
`
`any
`
`such
`
`amendment.
`
`According
`
`to Lien
`
`Law
`
`§12-a(2),
`
`"[i]n
`
`a proper
`
`case,
`
`the court may,
`
`upon
`
`five
`
`days'
`
`notice
`
`to existing
`
`lienors,
`
`mortgagees
`
`and
`
`owner,
`
`make
`
`an order
`
`amending
`
`a notice
`
`of
`
`lien
`
`upon
`
`a public
`
`provides
`
`that
`
`"a lienor
`
`or private
`
`improvement,
`
`nunc
`
`pro
`
`tunc".
`
`Lien
`
`Law
`
`§12-a(1)
`
`further
`
`may
`
`amend
`
`his
`
`lien
`
`upon
`
`twenty
`
`days
`
`notice
`
`to existing
`
`lienors,
`
`mortgagees
`
`and the owner,
`
`provided
`
`that
`
`no action
`
`or proceeding
`
`to enforce
`
`or cancel
`
`the
`
`mechanics'
`
`lien
`
`has been
`
`brought
`
`in the
`
`interim,
`
`where
`
`the purpose
`
`of
`
`the amendment
`
`is to reduce
`
`the amount
`
`of
`
`the lien...
`
`[However,]
`
`the question
`
`of wilful
`
`exaggeration
`
`shall
`
`survive
`
`such
`
`amendment"
`
`(see also Wellbilt
`
`Equip
`
`Corp
`
`v Fireman,
`
`275
`
`AD2d
`
`167-168).
`
`plaintiff's
`
`cross motion
`
`for
`
`162,
`
`Accordingly,
`
`leave
`
`to amend
`
`its notice
`
`of
`
`lien
`
`filed
`
`on March
`
`31,
`
`2015
`
`to reduce
`
`the
`
`amount
`
`thereof
`
`from
`
`$4,180,706.72
`
`to $2,962,489.37
`
`is
`
`granted,
`
`with
`
`the issue
`
`of any wilful
`
`exaggeration
`
`of
`
`the lien
`
`to be resolved
`
`at
`
`trial
`
`(see Exec
`
`Towers
`
`at Lido
`
`v. Metro
`
`Constr
`
`Servs,
`
`303 AD2d
`
`545).
`
`Finally,
`
`the
`
`cross
`
`motion
`
`to
`
`compel
`
`discovery
`
`by
`
`defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`is denied
`
`as
`
`academic
`
`in view ofplaintiff's
`
`response
`
`to its interrogatories
`
`and notice
`
`for discovery
`
`and inspection.
`
`9
`
`9
`
`of
`
`10
`
`

`

`FILED: RICHMOND COUNTY CLERK 05/23/2018 04:30 PM
`: 27
`12
`1FIriED:^™RTCHNONU"COUNTY"'CLER10d3f24f2017
`PNG
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91
`NYSCEF
`52
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`INDEX NO. 100930/2015
`INDEX
`100930/2015
`NO.
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/23/2018
`03/24/2017
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`
`I
`
`Accordingly,
`
`it
`
`is
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`the motion
`
`for
`
`consolidation
`
`by defendant
`
`Henick-Lane
`
`Inc
`
`is denied;
`
`and
`
`it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`said
`
`defendant's
`
`cross motion
`
`to compel
`
`discovery
`
`against
`
`plaintiff
`
`Adria
`
`Infrastructure,
`
`LLC
`
`is denied
`
`as academic;
`
`and
`
`it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`the
`
`cross motion
`
`for
`
`partial
`
`summary
`
`judgment
`
`by defendant
`
`Dormitory
`
`Authority
`
`- State
`
`of New York
`
`dismissing
`
`plaintiff
`
`s third,
`
`fourth
`
`and
`
`fifth
`
`causes
`
`of action
`
`against
`
`it
`
`is granted;
`
`and
`
`it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`said
`
`causes
`
`of action
`
`be severed
`
`as against
`
`this
`
`defendant;
`
`and
`
`it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`the cross motion
`
`by plaintiff
`
`Adria
`
`Infrastructure,
`
`LLC
`
`for
`
`leave
`
`to amend
`
`its notice
`
`of
`
`lien
`
`filed
`
`on March
`
`31, 2015,
`
`nunc
`
`pro tune,
`
`to reduce
`
`the amount
`
`claimed
`
`to be due and
`
`owing
`
`is granted;
`
`and
`
`it
`
`is further
`
`ORDERED
`
`that
`
`the Clerk
`
`enter
`
`judgment
`
`in accordance
`
`herewith.
`
`Dated:
`
`December
`
`1, 2016
`
`ENTER,
`
`c~
`KIM DOLLARD,
`
`A.J.S.C.
`
`GRANTED
`
`DEC
`
`21
`
`2016
`
`STEPHEN
`
`J. FIALA
`
`10
`
`10
`
`of
`
`10
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket