SALLY KEECH, PLAINTIFF, v. 30 EAST 85TH STREET COMPANY, LLC,ET AL., def-res, 30 EAST 85TH STREET CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATES, def-ap

4666. SALLY KEECH, PLAINTIFF, v. 30 EAST 85TH STREET COMPANY, LLC,ET AL., def-res, 30 EAST 85TH STREET CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATES, def-ap — Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (John B. Martin of counsel), for ap — Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York (Scott T. Horn of counsel), for 30 East 85th Street Company, LLC, res — Biedermann Hoenig Semprevivo, P.C., New York (Megan R. Siniscalchi of counsel), for Lululemon USA, Inc., res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered September 29, 2016, which, upon renewal, granted the motions of defendants 30 East 85th Street Company, LLC (Company) and Lululemon USA, Inc. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

4666. SALLY KEECH, PLAINTIFF, v. 30 EAST 85TH STREET COMPANY, LLC,ET AL., def-res, 30 EAST 85TH STREET CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATES, def-ap — Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (John B. Martin of counsel), for ap — Mischel & Horn, P.C., New York (Scott T. Horn of counsel), for 30 East 85th Street Company, LLC, res — Biedermann Hoenig Semprevivo, P.C., New York (Megan R. Siniscalchi of counsel), for Lululemon USA, Inc., res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered September 29, 2016, which, upon renewal, granted the motions of defendants 30 East 85th Street Company, LLC (Company) and Lululemon USA, Inc. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as to them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant 30 East 85th Street Condominium Associates’ (Condominium) argument that the renewal motion papers were inadequate because Company failed to submit the pleadings and because both Company and Lululemon failed to provide the condominium documents, is unpreserved and unavailing. CPLR 2214(c) provides that a party filing a motion in an e-filed action, such as this, need not include copies of papers that were previously filed electronically. Here, the pleadings were filed by Lululemon in connection with its renewed motion for summary judgment; thus, Company had no obligation to file them in support of its renewed motion. Moreover, although the condominium documents were not submitted, the record was sufficient for the motion court to determine whether movants were entitled to the relief they sought (see Chan v. Garcia, 24 AD3d 197, 198 [1st Dept 2005]).

SALLY KEECH, PLAINTIFF, v. 30 EAST 85TH STREET COMPANY, LLC,ET AL., def-res, 30 EAST 85TH STREET CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATES, def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal