Commercial Division Blog: Current Developments in the Commercial Divisions of the New York State Courts

On March 10, 2026, in Gans v. Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl, LLC, 247 AD3d 456, Index No. 152695/24, the Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed an order of Justice Anar Rathod Patel, which dismissed a legal malpractice complaint and denied leave to amend. Read More

On August 21, 2026, in Anexia, Inc. v. Horizon Data Solutions Ctr., LLC, Index No. 657444/2019, Justice Robert R. Reed granted plaintiff summary judgment dismissing defendant's counterclaim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Read More

On July 27, 2026, in Bourbiaux v. Probst, Index No. 651161/2025, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division granted in part and denied in part the managing members’ motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. Read More

On August 6, 2026, in Gonzalez v. Marte, Index No. 63818/2026, Justice Gretchen Walsh of the Westchester County Commercial Division denied plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint and dismissed the action without prejudice. Plaintiff alleged that defendant had failed to pay the balance due on a $530,000 promissory note given in connection with the sale of plaintiff’s shares in a restaurant corporation. Defendant never appeared or opposed the motion. The Court held that the motion had nonetheless been short-served, and explained: Read More

On August 6, 2026, in Kelly v Munn Works, LLC, Index No. 64177/2026, Justice Gretchen Walsh of the Westchester County Commercial Division granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint. Read More

On July 27, 2026, in Bourbiaux v. Probst, Index No. 651161/2025, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division granted in part and denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss. Read More

On July 15, 2026, in Magnetic Parts Trading Limited v National Air Cargo Group, Inc., Index No. 653266/2020, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division denied plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on its breach of lease claim, in part because an issue of fact existed under the doctrine of prevention. Read More

On July 10, 2026, in Schaeffer v GSE Worldwide, Index No. 652676/2021, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division denied the defendants’ motion to quash fourteen nonparty subpoenas. Read More

On July 23, 2026, in CPIF Lending, LLC v Segal, Index No. 652592/2025, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division held that a nonparty assignee had standing to move to substitute as plaintiff in an action for breach of guaranty. Read More

On January 11, 2022, in McCormack v. Kuras, Index No. 656434/2021, Justice Joel M. Cohen granted in part a petition for declaratory relief, declaring that petitioner is and remains the managing member of respondent Triboss Brooklyn, LLC. Respondents had attempted to remove petitioner as managing member by majority vote and to amend the company's articles of organization without petitioner's consent. The Court held that, under the unambiguous terms of the operating agreement, petitioner was appointed managing member and the agreement provided no basis for his removal by majority vote; the only provision addressing a change in the managing member applied where the managing members' aggregate ownership fell below 20 percent, a threshold petitioner had continuously exceeded. The Court also denied respondents' motion to dismiss the petition, denied petitioner's request for preliminary injunctive relief, and denied as premature the branch of the petition seeking judicial dissolution. In rejecting respondents' arguments, the Court explained: Read More

On July 10, 2026, in O’Connor v. Blue Diamond Growers, Index No. 160511/2025, Justice Andrea Masley of the New York County Commercial Division granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. Read More

On July 10, 2026, in Kim v. Radiology Associates of Main Street, P.C., Index No. 715347/2025, Justice Marguerite A. Grays of the Queens County Commercial Division denied defendant’s pre-answer motion to dismiss. Read More

On May 11, 2026, in Jennie Enterprise, et al., v. Michael Shvo, et al., Index No. 653221/2024, Justice Andrea Masley denied plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a second amended complaint adding causes of action for civil RICO violations, RICO conspiracy, fraudulent inducement, aiding and abetting fraudulent inducement, and breach of contract. Read More

On June 13, 2026, in Shanghai Commercial Bank Ltd., et al., v. New Tent, LLC, et al., Index No. 850240/2024, Justice Andrea Masley granted defendants’ motion for reargument, vacated the court’s prior summary judgment order, and ruled that the deed in lieu of foreclosure executed under the parties’ Forbearance Agreement must be treated as a mortgage under Real Property Law (“RPL”) § 320, requiring plaintiffs to proceed by foreclosure and sale. Read More

On June 5, 2026, in LAM Group v. Anthony T. Rinaldi LLC, Index No. 650465/2022, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division granted a defendant leave to file a third-party complaint, holding that the 2026 amendment to CPLR 1007 did not govern the application. Read More

On April 17, 2026, in Olam Global Agri Pte. Ltd. v. Social Islami Bank Ltd., Index No. 652242/2026, Justice Melissa A. Crane of the New York County Commercial Division denied plaintiff’s ex parte motion for a pre-judgment attachment of defendant’s New York correspondent bank accounts. Read More

On April 10, 2026, in I.B.I Volcano Investments LLC v. Apex South Creek IB, LLC, Index No. 655364/2025, Justice Melissa A. Crane of the New York County Commercial Division granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment in lieu of complaint. Read More

On May 5, 2026, in Samson MCA LLC v. DI Construction. LLC, Index No. E2024019427, Justice Daniel J. Doyle denied plaintiff’s motion under CPLR 3215(i) for entry of a default judgment and refused to enforce the parties’ stipulation of settlement. Plaintiff, a merchant cash advance funder, had purchased defendants’ future receivables under an agreement providing for attorneys’ fees calculated at 30% of the unremitted purchased amount. After defendants allegedly defaulted, the parties entered into a stipulation of settlement that incorporated those fees into the settlement balance and separately provided for an additional 25% in attorneys’ fees on the unpaid indebtedness in the event of a further default. The Court held that the stacked percentage-based attorneys’ fees provisions in both the underlying agreement and the settlement stipulation were procedurally and substantively unconscionable, and refused to enforce them. In denying the motion, the Court explained: Read More

On May 7, 2026, in J&A Concrete Corp. v. Everest Reins. Co., Index No. 813988/25E, Justice Fidel E. Gomez granted defendants’ motion under CPLR 510 to change venue to Albany County. The Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that the project’s payment bond required that suit be brought in Bronx County. The bond’s venue provision required that any suit be brought in the “State court [of] competent jurisdiction in and for the country or other political subdivision of the State in which the project, or any part thereof, is situated, or in the United States District Court for the district in which the project, or any part thereof, is situated, and not elsewhere.” (Emphasis added). Plaintiff argued that ‘country’ was a typographical error and should be read as ‘county.’ The Court declined to do so. The Court explained: Read More

On April 20, 2026, in D & V Realty LLC v. Klyukin, Index No. 656782/2022, Justice Joel M. Cohen granted defendant Mikhail Klyukin’s motion to dismiss the claims against him for lack of personal jurisdiction. Plaintiffs—members of three Manhattan real-estate development LLCs—alleged that defendants effected an improper change in the management of those LLCs in February 2022, shortly before Klyukin was designated by the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control as a Specially Designated National — a designation that, under OFAC’s 50%-ownership rule, also rendered the new management entities themselves blocked persons. Klyukin, a non-domiciliary, moved to dismiss under CPLR 3211(a)(8). Plaintiffs invoked long-arm jurisdiction under CPLR 302(a)(1), (a)(3), and (a)(4) and submitted emails and WhatsApp messages from 2016 through 2019 showing that Klyukin had exercised veto authority over the development projects through co-defendants then operating in New York. The Court held that, although the record showed Klyukin had exercised control over alleged New York-based agents through 2019, plaintiffs had produced no evidence—despite nearly four years of discovery—that Klyukin caused or participated in the 2022 management changes underpinning their claims. The Court also held that Klyukin’s indirect interest in New York real estate, through corporate entities, did not satisfy CPLR 302(a)(4)’s requirement that the defendant personally own, use, or possess the property at issue. In dismissing the claims, the Court explained: Read More