Mandalay Property Owners Ass'n v. Keiseheuer

291 A.D.2d 483, 738 N.Y.S.2d 677, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1870
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 19, 2002·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—In an action to permanently enjoin the defendants from violating a restrictive covenant and easement, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), dated October 31, 2000, which denied their motion to dismiss the defendants’ affirmative defense of unclean hands.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the issue of whether they have violated the same restrictive covenant and easement which they seek to enforce against the defendants is directly related to the subject matter of the litigation (see, Goldberg v Goldberg, 173 AD2d 679, 680; Mehlman v Avrech, 146 AD2d 753). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the defendants’ affirmative defense of unclean hands.

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Krausman and Townes, JJ., concur.

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

Mandalay Property Owners Ass'n v. Keiseheuer, 291 A.D.2d 483, 738 N.Y.S.2d 677, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

291 A.D.2d 483 (Mandalay Property Owners Ass'n v. Keiseheuer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kleist v. Stern
2020 NY Slip Op 05652 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Kaufman v. Kehler
5 A.D.3d 564 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)