J.C. Construction Management Corp. v. Robert Hunt Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

J.C. Construction Management Corp. v. Robert Hunt Co.

266 A.D.2d 512, 698 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12313

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

DecidedNovember 29, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 512 (J.C. Construction Management Corp. v. Robert Hunt 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

J.C. Construction Management Corp. v. Robert Hunt Co., 266 A.D.2d 512, 698 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12313 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant, Robert Hunt Company, appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Eerier, J.), dated September 25, 1998, as, upon the granting that branch of the motion of the plaintiff, J.C. Construction Management Corp., which was for reargument, in effect, granted that branch of the prior motion which was to strike, as invalid, the notice of mechanic’s lien filed by Robert Hunt Company.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

[513]*513Where, as here, a foreign corporation filing a notice of mechanic’s lien has one or more places of business within the State, its failure to recite the address of at least one of those locations on its notice of lien violates the Lien Law § 9 [1] and invalidates the lien (see, e.g., Matter of Rappoli Co. v Cupples Prod. Corp., 5 AD2d 758; John Roshirt, Inc. v Rosenstock, 138 Misc 515; Lincoln Natl. Bank v Peirce Co., 98 Misc 325, affd 172 NYS2d 904, affd 228 NY 359; Lien Law § 9 [1]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly struck the notice of mechanic’s lien filed by the appellant. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant, Robert Hunt Company, appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Eerier, J.), dated September 25, 1998, as, upon the granting that branch of the motion of the plaintiff, J.C. Construction Management Corp., which was for reargument, in effect, granted that branch of the prior motion which was to strike, as invalid, the notice of mechanic’s lien filed by Robert Hunt Company.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

[513]*513Where, as here, a foreign corporation filing a notice of mechanic’s lien has one or more places of business within the State, its failure to recite the address of at least one of those locations on its notice of lien violates the Lien Law § 9 [1] and invalidates the lien (see, e.g., Matter of Rappoli Co. v Cupples Prod. Corp., 5 AD2d 758; John Roshirt, Inc. v Rosenstock, 138 Misc 515; Lincoln Natl. Bank v Peirce Co., 98 Misc 325, affd 172 NYS2d 904, affd 228 NY 359; Lien Law § 9 [1]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly struck the notice of mechanic’s lien filed by the appellant. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 512, 698 N.Y.S.2d 901, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jc-construction-management-corp-v-robert-hunt-co-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack