Wesco Distribution, Inc. v. Teclan Data Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wesco Distribution, Inc. v. Teclan Data Corp.

267 A.D.2d 173, 700 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13371

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

DecidedDecember 28, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 267 A.D.2d 173 (Wesco Distribution, Inc. v. Teclan Data Corp.) 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

Wesco Distribution, Inc. v. Teclan Data Corp., 267 A.D.2d 173, 700 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13371 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered on or about June 9, 1998, which, in an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, granted defendant building owner’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, discharged the lien, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to amend the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The action was properly dismissed on the grounds that even under the proposed amended complaint, plaintiffs service of the notice of lien on the owner and contractor predated its filing of the notice of lien with the County Clerk, in violation of Lien Law former §§ 11 and 11-b requiring that such service be made either simultaneously or after such filing, and that such requirement is strictly enforced (see, 146 W. 45th St. Corp. v McNally, 188 AD2d 410). Concur — Tom, J. P., Wallach, 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 (Walter Tolub, J.), entered on or about June 9, 1998, which, in an action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien, granted defendant building owner’s motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action, discharged the lien, and denied plaintiff’s cross motion to amend the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The action was properly dismissed on the grounds that even under the proposed amended complaint, plaintiffs service of the notice of lien on the owner and contractor predated its filing of the notice of lien with the County Clerk, in violation of Lien Law former §§ 11 and 11-b requiring that such service be made either simultaneously or after such filing, and that such requirement is strictly enforced (see, 146 W. 45th St. Corp. v McNally, 188 AD2d 410). Concur — Tom, J. P., Wallach, Lerner, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 A.D.2d 173, 700 N.Y.S.2d 815, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13371, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wesco-distribution-inc-v-teclan-data-corp-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack