Opinion
2022–05709 Index No. 603135/22
09-13-2023
In the Matter of JT2 SQUARED REALTY, LLC, et al., appellants, v. INTERIORS BY SHELLEY STEIN–BIGAJER, respondent.
Kaufman Friedman Plotnicki & Grun, LLP, New York, NY (Ari Grun of counsel), for appellants. Jacobowitz Newman Tversky LLP, Cedarhurst, NY (Evan M. Newman and Rachel Wrubel of counsel), for respondent.
Kaufman Friedman Plotnicki & Grun, LLP, New York, NY (Ari Grun of counsel), for appellants.
Jacobowitz Newman Tversky LLP, Cedarhurst, NY (Evan M. Newman and Rachel Wrubel of counsel), for respondent.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., ROBERT J. MILLER, DEBORAH A. DOWLING, LILLIAN WAN, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER In a proceeding pursuant to Lien Law § 19(6) to summarily discharge a mechanic's lien, the petitioners appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Dawn Jimenez, J.), entered July 11, 2022. The order, insofar as appealed from, in effect, denied the petition and directed dismissal of the proceeding.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
A mechanic's lien was filed against certain real property. The petitioners commenced this proceeding pursuant to Lien Law § 19(6) to summarily discharge that mechanic's lien. In an order entered July 11, 2022, the Supreme Court, among other things, in effect, denied the petition and directed dismissal of the proceeding. The petitioners appeal. Lien Law § 19(6) provides that an owner or any other party in interest may apply for an order summarily discharging of record an alleged mechanic's lien for private improvement. "[T]o be summarily discharged, the notice of lien must be invalid on its face" ( Matter of Old Post Rd. Assoc., LLC v. LRC Constr., LLC, 177 A.D.3d 658, 659, 112 N.Y.S.3d 254 ). "When there is no defect on the face of the notice of lien, any dispute regarding the validity of the lien must await the lien foreclosure trial" ( id. at 659, 112 N.Y.S.3d 254 ). "In determining the validity of a notice of lien, the requirements of the Lien Law are to be construed liberally to secure the beneficial interests and purposes thereof. A substantial compliance with its several provisions shall be sufficient for the validity of a lien and to give jurisdiction to the courts to enforce the same" ( Matter of Matrix Staten Is. Dev., LLC v. BKS–NY, LLC, 204 A.D.3d 1004, 1005, 167 N.Y.S.3d 530 [citations and internal quotation marks omitted]; see Lien Law § 23 ; Matter of Malbro Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Straightedge Bldrs., Inc., 188 A.D.3d 1068, 1068, 132 N.Y.S.3d 649 ).
Here, contrary to the petitioners’ contention, the mechanic's lien is not invalid on its face (see Matter of Matrix Staten Is. Dev., LLC v. BKS–NY, LLC, 204 A.D.3d at 1005, 167 N.Y.S.3d 530 ; Matter of Malbro Constr. Servs., Inc. v. Straightedge Bldrs., Inc., 188 A.D.3d at 1068–1069, 132 N.Y.S.3d 649 ; Matter of Old Post Rd. Assoc., LLC v. LRC Constr., LLC, 177 A.D.3d at 660, 112 N.Y.S.3d 254 ). Thus, the Supreme Court properly, in effect, denied the petition to summarily discharge the mechanic's lien and directed dismissal of the proceeding.
Accordingly, we affirm the order insofar as appealed from.
DILLON, J.P., MILLER, DOWLING and WAN, JJ., concur.