Tanya R. Kennedy

Law Clerk, Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decision record

Newest first · every case links to the full record

Aras v. B-U Realty Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023-10-03 · cited 1×
This case involved current and former tenants of a Manhattan apartment building suing the owner and managing agent for rent overcharges, claiming the landlord had improperly deregulated units while receiving J-51 tax benefits and engaged in a building-wide fraudulent scheme that warranted use of the default formula to calculate damages. The motion court granted partial summary judgment on liability for several plaintiffs and applied the default formula after finding fraud, but held other claims in abeyance or denied them. On cross-appeals, the Appellate Division modified the order, ruling that the base date for all claims was four years before the original complaint and that the record lacked evidence of fraud as a matter of law to taint the base date rents or permit the default formula under the Rent Stabilization Code. Instead, damages must be calculated under standard provisions of the Rent Stabilization Law, with summary judgment granted only where overcharges were conceded and certain claims remanded or denied for lack of proof.
propertybusiness & regulatory
Sutherland v. Tutor Perini Bldg. Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022-06-30
In Sutherland v. Tutor Perini Bldg. Corp., a lather foreman employed by a subcontractor on a Manhattan high-rise construction project sued the general contractor and others after slipping on a wet plywood surface while manually lowering rebar in the rain, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 241(6) based on Industrial Code § 23-1.7(d). The trial court granted the plaintiff partial summary judgment on that claim, but the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed and denied the motion. The majority held that triable issues of fact existed as to proximate causation, including whether the plaintiff, in his role as foreman, had authority and discretion to halt work on the slippery surface or whether he was following explicit directions from a general foreman to continue despite the conditions. The court noted the absence of evidence on who held final authority to stop work and lack of objective data on the rain's severity, precluding a finding that the code violation was the sole cause as a matter of law.
labor & employmenttorts & liability

Judicial data via CourtListener (Free Law Project). Social links via Wikidata.

Decision record

Newest first · every case links to the full record

Aras v. B-U Realty Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2023-10-03 · cited 1×
This case involved current and former tenants of a Manhattan apartment building suing the owner and managing agent for rent overcharges, claiming the landlord had improperly deregulated units while receiving J-51 tax benefits and engaged in a building-wide fraudulent scheme that warranted use of the default formula to calculate damages. The motion court granted partial summary judgment on liability for several plaintiffs and applied the default formula after finding fraud, but held other claims in abeyance or denied them. On cross-appeals, the Appellate Division modified the order, ruling that the base date for all claims was four years before the original complaint and that the record lacked evidence of fraud as a matter of law to taint the base date rents or permit the default formula under the Rent Stabilization Code. Instead, damages must be calculated under standard provisions of the Rent Stabilization Law, with summary judgment granted only where overcharges were conceded and certain claims remanded or denied for lack of proof.
propertybusiness & regulatory
Sutherland v. Tutor Perini Bldg. Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022-06-30
In Sutherland v. Tutor Perini Bldg. Corp., a lather foreman employed by a subcontractor on a Manhattan high-rise construction project sued the general contractor and others after slipping on a wet plywood surface while manually lowering rebar in the rain, alleging a violation of Labor Law § 241(6) based on Industrial Code § 23-1.7(d). The trial court granted the plaintiff partial summary judgment on that claim, but the Appellate Division, First Department, reversed and denied the motion. The majority held that triable issues of fact existed as to proximate causation, including whether the plaintiff, in his role as foreman, had authority and discretion to halt work on the slippery surface or whether he was following explicit directions from a general foreman to continue despite the conditions. The court noted the absence of evidence on who held final authority to stop work and lack of objective data on the rain's severity, precluding a finding that the code violation was the sole cause as a matter of law.
labor & employmenttorts & liability