Mayes v. UVI Holdings, L. L. C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mayes v. UVI Holdings, L. L. C.

268 A.D.2d 209, 700 N.Y.S.2d 682, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17

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

DecidedJanuary 4, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 268 A.D.2d 209 (Mayes v. UVI Holdings, L. L. C.) 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

Mayes v. UVI Holdings, L. L. C., 268 A.D.2d 209, 700 N.Y.S.2d 682, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered January 7, 1999, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs summary judgment on the issue of defendant landlord’s liability under the cause of action for wrongful eviction, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant partial summary judgment on that cause of action in favor of the Mayes plaintiffs only, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Civil Court’s determination in the eviction proceeding that the landlord wrongfully evicted the Mayes plaintiffs collaterally estops the landlord from denying its liability to the Mayes plaintiffs in this action absent a showing that it did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue of its wrongdoing in Civil Court (see, Hernandez v Nelson, 143 AD2d 632). The landlord makes no such showing. Nor is the landlord’s liability [210]*210to the Mayes plaintiffs affected by its cross claims against its attorneys in the eviction proceeding and the City Marshal (see, Maracina v Shirrmeister, 105 AD2d 672, 673). However, the IAS Court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the Sanchez plaintiffs, since questions of fact remain as to whether they had a possessory interest in the apartment as would entitle them to a remedy for wrongful eviction under RPAPL 853. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered January 7, 1999, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffs summary judgment on the issue of defendant landlord’s liability under the cause of action for wrongful eviction, unanimously modified, on the law, to grant partial summary judgment on that cause of action in favor of the Mayes plaintiffs only, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Civil Court’s determination in the eviction proceeding that the landlord wrongfully evicted the Mayes plaintiffs collaterally estops the landlord from denying its liability to the Mayes plaintiffs in this action absent a showing that it did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue of its wrongdoing in Civil Court (see, Hernandez v Nelson, 143 AD2d 632). The landlord makes no such showing. Nor is the landlord’s liability [210]*210to the Mayes plaintiffs affected by its cross claims against its attorneys in the eviction proceeding and the City Marshal (see, Maracina v Shirrmeister, 105 AD2d 672, 673). However, the IAS Court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the Sanchez plaintiffs, since questions of fact remain as to whether they had a possessory interest in the apartment as would entitle them to a remedy for wrongful eviction under RPAPL 853. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 209, 700 N.Y.S.2d 682, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mayes-v-uvi-holdings-l-l-c-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack