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

You searched for: "Special Referee"

Search Results

March 11, 2024 Court Confirms Special Referee Decision
On January 23, 2024, Justice Margaret A. Chan of the New York County Commercial Division, issued a decision in Wells Fargo Bank, National Association v. 555 Retail Owner LLC, Index No. 850277/2021, granting the plaintiff’s unopposed motion to confirm the Report and Recommendation issued by the Special Referee calculating the damages and interest owed on a defaulted mortgage and recommending that the mortgage premises be sold in a single parcel. The Court explained: Read More
July 5, 2023 Court Declines to Vacate Note of Issue Where Remaining Issues Could Be Decided on Post-Discovery Motions Or Were Not Preserved
On May 31, 2023, Justice Robert R. Reed of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Oldcastle Precast v. Steiner Bldg. N.Y. City LLC, 2023 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2675, denying defendants’ motion to vacate the note of issue. In the action, the parties had proceeded in discovery before a special referee, who had decided numerous discovery issues prior to the filing of the note of issue but left certain other issues relating to sanctions and the admissibility of certain expert reports for the Court to decide. The Court rejected defendants’ arguments that the special referee’s failure to decide these issues warranted vacating the note of issue, because those issues could still be addresses on summary judgment or motions in limine or were not preserved. Read More
March 17, 2023 Attorneys’ Fees Award Reasonable Based on Work Completed and Result Achieved
On February 14, 2023, Justice Margaret Chan of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Pacific Premier Bank v. HNI, LLC, 2023 N.Y. LEXIS 647, confirming the report and recommendation of Special Referee Jeremy R. Feinberg awarding plaintiff nearly $1 million in attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in the litigation pursuant to a contractual provision. The Court explained: Read More