Board of Mgrs. of the Waterwheel Condominium v. Ardsley Waterwheel Partners, LLC

Opinion

Board of Mgrs. of the Waterwheel Condominium v Ardsley Waterwheel Partners, LLC

2026 NY Slip Op 04834

August 5, 2026

Appellate Division, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This decision is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Board of Managers of the Waterwheel Condominium, plaintiff,

v

Ardsley Waterwheel Partners, LLC, et al., defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants; County of Westchester, third-party defendant-respondent.

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Decided on August 5, 2026

2024-06328, (Index No. 58316/21)

Valerie Brathwaite Nelson, J.P.

Lillian Wan

Laurence L. Love

Elena Goldberg Velazquez, JJ.

London Fischer LLP, New York, NY (Jacob D. Gash of counsel), for defendants third-party plaintiffs-appellants.

John M. Nonna, County Attorney, White Plains, NY (Jason S. Whitehead of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.

[*1]

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to recover damages for injury to real property and a related third-party action, inter alia, for common-law indemnification and contribution, the defendants third-party plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Charles D. Wood, J.), dated April 3, 2024. The order granted the motion of the third-party defendant County of Westchester pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the amended third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On May 8, 2013, in connection with a condominium construction project, Ardsley Waterwheel Partners, LLC (hereinafter AWP), entered into a contract with the County of Westchester for AWP, as developer, to perform infrastructure improvements with the County providing funding. In June 2021, the plaintiff commenced this action against AWP and its principals, Conrad J. Roncati and Matthew Perasso (hereinafter collectively the AWP defendants), seeking to recover damages for injury to the condominium complex allegedly caused by negligently performed work. The AWP defendants commenced a third-party action against, among others, the County, and the amended third-party complaint, inter alia, asserted third-party causes of action for common-law indemnification and contribution against the County. Thereafter, the County moved pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the amended third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it, arguing, among other things, that the third-party action was barred by a release. In an order dated April 3, 2024, the Supreme Court granted the motion. The AWP defendants appeal.

The Supreme Court properly granted the County's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the amended third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it based upon a valid release. "Generally, a valid release constitutes a complete bar to an action on a claim which is the subject of the release" (Centro Empresarial Cempresa S.A. v América Móvil, S.A.B. de C.V., 17 NY3d 269, 276 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Ivasyuk v Raglan, 197 AD3d 635, 636). "A release is a contract, and its construction is governed by contract law" (Kaminsky v Gamache, 298 AD2d 361, [*2]361; see Ivasyuk v Raglan, 197 AD3d at 636). The release entered into by the parties was intended to resolve the instant controversy regarding the County's alleged actions in connection with the construction project. The release precluded the third-party causes of action for common-law indemnification and contribution against the County. Accordingly, the court properly granted the County's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the amended third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it.

The parties' remaining contentions need not be reached in light of our determination.

BRATHWAITE NELSON, J.P., WAN, LOVE and GOLDBERG VELAZQUEZ, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Darrell M. Joseph

Clerk of the Court