Statutory Amendment Overturning Prior Case Law That Occurred While Action Was Pending Justified Granting Motion For Renewal Of Argument

Posted: August 6, 2025 / Written by: Jeffrey M. Eilender, Thomas A. Kissane, Samuel L. Butt, Joshua Wurtzel, Channing J. Turner / Category Renewal/Reconsideration/Reargument

Statutory Amendment Overturning Prior Case Law That Occurred While Action Was Pending Justified Granting Motion For Renewal Of Argument

On May 19, 2025, Justice Margaret Chan granted plaintiffs’ motion to renew argument for summary judgment based on a statutory amendment that overturned prior case law during the case. In Berton Rose, et al., v. Gazivoda 118 LLC, Index No. 152051/2020, the plaintiffs brought an action for rent overcharge and moved for summary judgment based on a claim of fraud. The Court denied them summary judgment based, in part, upon its interpretation of whether their fraud claim met a statutory exception in the Housing Stability and Tenant Protection Act of 2019. About a year later, plaintiffs moved to renew their motion based on an amendment to statutory law that changed the standard for evaluating their fraud claim.

The Court agreed that the change in law justified granting the motion to renew, although it still ultimately denied plaintiffs summary judgment. It explained:

Plaintiffs next content that intervening statutory amendments no longer require plaintiff[s] to prove all common law elements of fraud to trigger the look-back rule’s fraud exception, but instead require the court to look at the totality of the circumstances, a standard plaintiffs claim they meet. . . . [O]n March 1, 2024, Governor Hochul signed into law Senate Bill 8011/Assembly Bill 8506 (the “Chapter Amendments”), which amended Section 2 of Part B of Chapter 760 of the Laws of 2023. . . . The Chapter Amendments therefore overturned case law requiring plaintiffs to allege every element of common law fraud. The law now requires only an examination of the “totality of the circumstances” to determine whether defendant “knowingly” engaged in a fraudulent scheme . . . . Given this change of law, plaintiffs’ motion for renewal is granted . . . .

The attorneys at Schlam Stone & Dolan frequently advise clients concerning the availability of special procedures that allow renewal of prior arguments or alteration of decisions. Contact the Commercial Division Blog Committee at commercialdivisionblog@schlamstone.com if you or a client have questions concerning such issues.