From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vinokur v. Penny Lane Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 17, 2000
269 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

February 17, 2000

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alfred Toker, J.), entered October 7, 1998, which, in an action by a tenant/shareholder against a residential cooperative for, inter alia, a declaration that his breach of the lease has been cured, and against a mortgage company for an injunction against its foreclosing on his shares, denied plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction against the mortgage company foreclosing on the shares, and granted the coop's cross motion to dismiss the action and for attorneys' fees to the extent of dismissing the action, unanimously modified, on the law, to award the coop attorneys' fees, and remand for an assessment of the reasonable value thereof, and otherwise affirmed, with one bill of costs payable by plaintiff to defendants-respondents-appellants.

Arthur Morrison, for plaintiff-appellant-respondent.

David E. Frazer, for defendants-respondents-appellants.

Mitchell Devack, for defendant-respondent.

NARDELLI, J.P., TOM, WALLACH, RUBIN, ANDRIAS, JJ.


The action was properly dismissed on the ground that plaintiff's claims, including that the warrant of eviction was obtained fraudulently, should have been raised in the Civil Court proceeding that resulted in the issuance of the warrant. A litigant's remedy for alleged fraud in the course of a legal proceeding "lies exclusively in that lawsuit itself, i.e., by moving pursuant to CPLR 5015 to vacate the civil judgment due to its fraudulent procurement, not a second plenary action collaterally attacking the judgment in the original action." (Yalkowsky v. Century Apts. Assocs., 215 A.D.2d 214, 215; see also,Matter of Stillwell, 139 N.Y. 337, 340-341). The same is true with respect to plaintiff's claim that the alterations underlying the judgment of possession have been cured, an issue that has now been considered on the merits by Civil Court and is pending before Appellate Term (see, Ansonia Assocs. v. Costa, 167 A.D.2d 134, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 802). The lease provision for attorneys' fees covers this litigation brought by plaintiff to be restored to possession (see, Simithis v. 4 Keys Leasing Maintenance Co., 151 A.D.2d 339, 341-342), and, accordingly, we modify to award the attorneys' fees to the coop.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Vinokur v. Penny Lane Owners Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 17, 2000
269 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Vinokur v. Penny Lane Owners Corp.

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL VINOKUR, Plaintiff-Appellant-Respondent, v. PENNY LANE OWNERS…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Feb 17, 2000

Citations

269 A.D.2d 226 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
703 N.Y.S.2d 35

Citing Cases

St. Clement v. Londa

The remedy for fraud allegedly committed during the course of a legal proceeding must be exercised in that…

Rakosi v. Daniel Perla Assocs

The action was properly dismissed as against defendants-respondents on the ground that it constitutes a…