Greenbrier Farms, Inc. v. Central Jersey Landscape Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenbrier Farms, Inc. v. Central Jersey Landscape Co.

30 A.D.2d 529, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4102

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

DecidedMay 1, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 529 (Greenbrier Farms, Inc. v. Central Jersey Landscape Co.) 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

Greenbrier Farms, Inc. v. Central Jersey Landscape Co., 30 A.D.2d 529, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4102 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Motion by appellants for reargument or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. Motion granted to the extent of granting reargument; and, upon such reargument, the original determination of this court is adhered to. At bar it appears without contradiction that prior to the expiration date of the mechanic’s lien, plaintiff served and filed a summons and complaint and a lis pendens. While the subsequent order extending the lien was invalid by reason of its entry after the expiration date of the lien (Dittmar Explosives v. A. E. Ottaviano, Inc., 20 N Y 2d 498), nevertheless, the filing of the pleadings and lis pendens, before the expiration date of the lien, constituted an effective and alternate method of timely extending the lien (Lien Law, §§ 18, 21). In any event, even if the tenure of plaintiff’s notice of lien was ineffectively extended, plaintiff’s complaint is not to be dismissed without an opportunity to amend so as to replead within the framework of the trust provisions of the Lien Law (Dittmar Explosives v. A. E. Ottaviano, Inc., supra). Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

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

Motion by appellants for reargument or, in the alternative, for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals. Motion granted to the extent of granting reargument; and, upon such reargument, the original determination of this court is adhered to. At bar it appears without contradiction that prior to the expiration date of the mechanic’s lien, plaintiff served and filed a summons and complaint and a lis pendens. While the subsequent order extending the lien was invalid by reason of its entry after the expiration date of the lien (Dittmar Explosives v. A. E. Ottaviano, Inc., 20 N Y 2d 498), nevertheless, the filing of the pleadings and lis pendens, before the expiration date of the lien, constituted an effective and alternate method of timely extending the lien (Lien Law, §§ 18, 21). In any event, even if the tenure of plaintiff’s notice of lien was ineffectively extended, plaintiff’s complaint is not to be dismissed without an opportunity to amend so as to replead within the framework of the trust provisions of the Lien Law (Dittmar Explosives v. A. E. Ottaviano, Inc., supra). Brennan, Acting P. J., Rabin, Hopkins, Munder and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 529, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenbrier-farms-inc-v-central-jersey-landscape-co-nyappdiv-1968.