Avon Electrical Supplies, Inc. v. Goldsmith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Avon Electrical Supplies, Inc. v. Goldsmith

54 A.D.2d 552, 387 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13857

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 20, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 54 A.D.2d 552 (Avon Electrical Supplies, Inc. v. Goldsmith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Avon Electrical Supplies, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 54 A.D.2d 552, 387 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13857 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered January 13, 1976, which (1) denied its application, pursuant to section 12-a of the Lien Law, to amend its notice of lien nunc pro tunc and (2) granted respondent Slayton’s cross motion to vacate and discharge its notice of lien. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Amendment of the notice of lien under section 12-a of the Lien Law was not a remedy available to plaintiff on the facts of this case because there had not been substantial compliance with the provision of the Lien Law requiring a description of the subject property (see Lien Law, § 9, subd 7; § 23). The lienor described, and filed a lien against, property adjacent to the improved premises. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Cohalan and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, entered January 13, 1976, which (1) denied its application, pursuant to section 12-a of the Lien Law, to amend its notice of lien nunc pro tunc and (2) granted respondent Slayton’s cross motion to vacate and discharge its notice of lien. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Amendment of the notice of lien under section 12-a of the Lien Law was not a remedy available to plaintiff on the facts of this case because there had not been substantial compliance with the provision of the Lien Law requiring a description of the subject property (see Lien Law, § 9, subd 7; § 23). The lienor described, and filed a lien against, property adjacent to the improved premises. Gulotta, P. J., Hopkins, Latham, Cohalan and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

54 A.D.2d 552, 387 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avon-electrical-supplies-inc-v-goldsmith-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack