Nagi v. Ninety-Fourth St., LLC

2024 NY Slip Op 33269(U)
CourtNew York Supreme Court, New York County
DecidedSeptember 18, 2024
DocketIndex No. 156589/2020
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 33269(U) (Nagi v. Ninety-Fourth St., LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court, New York County primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Nagi v. Ninety-Fourth St., LLC, 2024 NY Slip Op 33269(U) (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2024).

Opinion

Nagi v Ninety-Fourth St., LLC 2024 NY Slip Op 33269(U) September 18, 2024 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 156589/2020 Judge: Judy H. Kim Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York State and local government sources, including the New York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. INDEX NO. 156589/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 184 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2024

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: HON. JUDY H. KIM PART 04 Justice ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------X INDEX NO. 156589/2020 ADEL NAGI, WESTSIDE STOP ONE DELI CORP., MOTION DATE 08/14/2023 Plaintiffs, MOTION SEQ. NO. 007 - V -

NINETY-FOURTH STREET, LLC, PARISH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC.,SW ENGINEERING COMPANY, DECISION + ORDER ON PLLC, MOTION

Defendants. ------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------X

PARISH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., Third-Party Index No. 595103/2022 Plaintiff,

-against-

K & G RESTORATION, INC.,

Defendant. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- X

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 007) 166, 167, 168, 169, 170,171,172,173,174,175,177,178 were read on this motion to AMEND CAPTION/PLEADINGS

On August 20, 2020, plaintiffs commenced this action alleging property damage to their

leased space (the "Premises") located at 700 Amsterdam Avenue, New York, New York 10025

("Building") (NYSCEF Doc. No. I [Compl.]). Plaintiffs allege that defendants Ninety-Fourth

Street, LLC ("Ninety-Fourth"), Parish Property Management, Inc. and SW Engineering Company,

PLLC, caused damages to the Premises because of improper, careless and negligent work done to

the fa<;ade of the Building (NYSCEF Doc. No. I [Compl. at ,J,J 6-25]).

156589/2020 NAGI, ADEL vs. NINETY-FOURTH STREET, LLC Page 1 of 6 Motion No. 007

1 of 6 [* 1] INDEX NO. 156589/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 184 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2024

Plaintiffs now move, pursuant to CPLR 3025(b) and 203(c), to amend their complaint to

add Citi-Urban Management Corp. ("Citi-Urban") as a defendant. In support of their motion,

plaintiffs' counsel avers that it was "Citi-Urban, not defendant Ninety-Fourth [sic] supervised,

managed and controlled the construction project that caused the damages at issue" in this action

(NYSCEF Doc. No. 167 [Glanzberg Affirm. at i117). Plaintiffs note that the American Institute of

Architects ("AIA") "Standard Form of Agreement Between Owner and Contractor" (the "AIA

Contract") for the project at issue, produced in discovery in December 2022 (after the statute of

limitations had elapsed) identifies the owner of the Premises as "Ninety Fourth Street, LLC c/o

Citi-Urban Properties" (NYSCEF Doc. No. 170 [AIA Contract]) and add that Ninety-Fourth

Street, LLC's witness, Eric Borkowski, Senior Property Manager for City-Urban Management

Corp., testified, among other things, that an employee of Citi-Urban regularly visited the subject

premises during the course of the work (NYSCEF Doc. No. 168 [Borkowski Tr. at pp. 5, 19, 63]).

The Court notes that Borkowski also testified that City-Urban is a property management company

which has a management agreement with Ninety-Fourth (Id. at p. 17).

In opposition, defendants submit a stipulation entered into between Adel Nagi and Ninety-

Fourth in connection with a nonpayment proceeding in Civil Court, New York County between

Ninety-Fourth as Petitioner, and Adel Nagi as the Respondent. This stipulation, dated January 18,

2022 (the "Settlement Stipulation"), provides, in pertinent part, that:

In consideration of the Respondent's agreement to discontinue with prejudice the action Adel Nagi and West Stop One Deli Corp. v. Ninety-Fourth Street, LLC, et al Index No. 156589/20 (hereinafter "supreme court action") against Defendant Ninety-Fourth Street, LLC, the Petitioner agrees to waive the sum of $28,717.09 leaving a balance of $120.000.00"

The parties herein agree to execute and submit for filing a Stipulation of Discontinuance With Prejudice in the supreme court action against Defendant

156589/2020 NAGI, ADEL vs. NINETY-FOURTH STREET, LLC Page 2 of 6 Motion No. 007

2 of 6 [* 2] INDEX NO. 156589/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 184 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2024

Ninety-Fourth Street, LLC by the close of business on Friday, January 21, 2022. Notwithstanding the discontinuance, Defendant Ninety-Fourth Street, LLC agrees to respond to the discovery demands served upon it to date, appear for a deposition in the ordinary course of the litigation, and reasonably provide any other documentation requested in the supreme court action.

(NYSCEF Doc. No. 181 [Stipulation of Settlement at ,J,J4, 1O] [emphasis added]).

Ninety-Fourth Street LLC argues, in sum and substance, that as this action has been

discontinued as against it, there is no defendant in this case to which Citi-Urban Management is

related, rendering the relation back doctrine inapplicable.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs' motion is granted. "Leave to amend pleadings under CPLR 3025(b) should be

freely given and denied only if there is prejudice or surprise resulting directly from the delay or if

the proposed amendment is palpably improper or insufficient as a matter oflaw" (McGhee v Odell,

96 AD3d 449, 450 [1st Dept 2012] [internal citations and quotations omitted]). Here, the

amendment sought is neither palpably improper nor insufficient as a matter of law (See Stabile v

Century 21 Dept. Stores, LLC., 2019 NY Slip Op 30517[U], *1-2 [Sup Ct, NY County 2019]).

While the instant motion was filed on August 14, 2023, after the statute of limitations'

expiration on November 20, 2020 (accounting for the toll created by Executive Order No. 202.8),

this does not present a bar to amendment, as the negligence claims plaintiffs seek to assert against

Cit-Urban remain viable under the relation-back doctrine. This doctrine allows new parties to be

joined in a previously-commenced action after the expiration of the statute of limitations when:

( 1) the claims against the new defendants arise from the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence

as the claims against the original defendants; (2) the new defendants are "united in interest" with

the original defendants, and will not suffer prejudice due to lack of notice; and (3) the new

defendants knew or should have known that, but for the plaintiffs' mistake, they would have been

156589/2020 NAGI, ADEL vs. NINETY-FOURTH STREET, LLC Page 3 of 6 Motion No. 007

3 of 6 [* 3] INDEX NO. 156589/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 184 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/18/2024

included as defendants (Higgins v City of New York, 144 AD3d 511, 512-13 [1st Dept 2016]

[internal citations omitted]).

Here, plaintiffs have established through the AIA Contract that their claims against Citi-

Urban arise from the same conduct as their original claims against Ninety-Fourth and that Citi-

Urban, as Ninety-Fourth's managing agent, is "united in interest" with Ninety-Fourth such that it

knew or should have known that, but for the plaintiffs' mistake, it would have been included as

defendants (See~' Ellis v Newmark & Co. Real Est., 209 AD3d 520, 521-522 [1st Dept 2022]).

Contrary to Ninety-Fourth's claim, the Settlement Stipulation does not preclude the

amendment sought.

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

Related

Ganzi v. Ganzi
2016 NY Slip Op 7613 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Ellis v. Newmark & Co. Real Estate, Inc.
177 N.Y.S.3d 15 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2022)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 NY Slip Op 33269(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nagi-v-ninety-fourth-st-llc-nysupctnewyork-2024.