ADDITIONAL CASES Oceanview Manor Acquisition I, LLC and Oceanview Manor Home for Adults, Inc., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff v. American Tower Corporation, Third-Party Defendant The following e-filed papers read herein: NYSCEF Doc Nos. Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause/Petition/Cross Motion and Affidavits (Affirmations) Annexed 115, 117-124 126, 128-135 Opposing Affidavits (Affirmations) 138-159 Reply Affidavits (Affirmations) 161-164 Sur-Reply Affidavits (Affirmations) 175-177 Upon the foregoing papers, Plaintiff Cell Tower Lease Acquisition LLC (CTLA) moves (in motion sequence [mot. seq.] six) for an order, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (a) (7), dismissing the counterclaims asserted against it by defendants and third-party plaintiffs Oceanview Manor Acquisition I, LLC (OMA) and Oceanview Manor Home For Adults Inc. (OMH) (collectively, the Oceanview Parties). Third-Party Defendant American Tower Corporation (American Tower or ATC) moves (in mot. seq. seven) for an order, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (a) (7), dismissing the Oceanview Parties’ third-party claims asserted against it in the amended third-party complaint. Background On December 7, 2021, CTLA, a company engaged “in the business of owning, managing, and/or leasing wireless communications sites,” commenced this action against the Oceanview Parties (NYSCEF Doc No. 1 at 6). On March 6, 2023, CTLA e-filed an amended complaint alleging that: “[t]his action is being brought by Plaintiff for injunctive, declaratory, and other relief resulting from Defendants’ unlawful refusal to allow Plaintiff unfettered access, as permitted by the [September 7, 2006] Rooftop Easement and Assignment Agreement,1 to the wireless communications site situated on the premises located at 3010 West 33rd Street [in] Brooklyn…(the ‘Property’)” (NYSCEF Doc No. 64 at 4). The Oceanview Parties allegedly own the Property, “a multi-story assisted living facility located near Coney Island…” (id. at
5 and 8). The amended complaint alleges that “[t]he rooftop wireless communication site located on the Property…consists of antennas and other telecommunications equipment from which [CTLA's] Customers transmit signals…to their customers and other end users in the vicinity of the Property” (id. at 7). Under the Easement Agreement, the Oceanview Parties allegedly agreed to provide CTLA and its Customers with access to and from the Easements and, as a result, “Plaintiff and its Customers are contractually entitled to unfettered access to the Site twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a week” (id. at
