absence of a valid defense in New York

2015Solutions USA, Inc. v Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assoc. of Queens, P.C., 100 AD3d 620 , 621 [2012]; see also TCF Equip.

2013Solutions USA, Inc. v Magnetic Resonance Imaging Assoc, of Queens, P.C., 100 AD3d 620 , 621 [2012]).

2013Servs., Inc. v Decoteau, 103 AD3d 761 , 762 [2013]; Siemens Med.

2013Servs., Inc. v Decoteau, 103 AD3d 761 , 762 [2013]; Siemens Med.

2012Corp. v Banco Popular N. Am., 19 AD3d 341 [2005]; Stoll Am.

2012Corp. v Banco Popular N. Am., 19 AD3d 341 [2005]; Stoll Am.

2005Knitting Mach, v Creative Knitwear Corp., 5 AD3d 586, 587 [2004]; Zweng v Thompson, 283 AD2d 641 [2001]), the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for an order of seizure (see CPLR 7102 [d]).

2004Since the plaintiff failed to satisfy its burden of establishing “both a likelihood of success in the action and the absence of a valid defense” (Zweng v Thompson, 283 AD2d 641 [2001], quoting Orix Credit Alliance v Grace Indus., 232 AD2d 537 [1996]; CPLR 7102 [d]) to its claim, the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for an order of seizure.

2017Co. v Chock Full O’Nuts Corp., 86 AD2d 315, 321 [1st Dept 1982], lv dismissed 58 NY2d 800 [1983]).

2012Thus, in Maceróla, we rejected a per se rule that simultaneous representation of codefendants automatically requires reversal in the absence of a valid waiver: “There may always exist those cases in which joint representation of multiple defendants is, without doubt, justified, and the court’s neglect in admonishing codefendants of the potential risks entailed in joint representation would not deprive, without more, a defendant of his right to the effective assistance of counsel” ( 47 NY2d at 264 ).

2012Similarly, in Cuyler , the Supreme Court, though observing that “a possible conflict inheres in almost every instance of multiple representation” ( 446 US at 348 ), held that the mere “possibility of conflict is insufficient to impugn a criminal conviction” (id. at 350).

2011We agree with the court that the commencement of the action, without the permission of the court, was frivolous and that sanctions were warranted (see Matter of Rachel’s Trousseau [Warshaw Woolen Assoc.], 249 AD2d 148 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 810 [1998]; 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 [a]).

2011The record supports the court’s discretionary cancellation of the notice of pendency pursuant to CPLR 6514 (b), since the notice of pendency could not be maintained in the absence of a valid claim (see Jericho Group Ltd. v Midtown Dev., L.P., 67 AD3d 431, 432 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 712 [2010]; Sorenson v 257/117 Realty, LLC, 62 AD3d 618, 619 [2009], lv dismissed 13 NY3d 935 [2010]).

2011The record supports the court’s discretionary cancellation of the notice of pendency pursuant to CPLR 6514 (b), since the notice of pendency could not be maintained in the absence of a valid claim (see Jericho Group Ltd. v Midtown Dev., L.P., 67 AD3d 431, 432 [2009], lv denied 14 NY3d 712 [2010]; Sorenson v 257/117 Realty, LLC, 62 AD3d 618, 619 [2009], lv dismissed 13 NY3d 935 [2010]).

2007(Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York, 301 AD2d 845 [3d Dept 2003].) Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ordered that the CSEA’s petition is in all respects denied; and it is further ordered that the District’s petition is granted and the CSEA’s petition is dismissed.

1999Counsel’s comment to the court, outside the presence of the jury, concerning the absence of a valid defense, was not contrary to defendant’s interests given the context in which the comments were made (see, People v Rowe, 258 AD2d 378 , lv denied, 93 NY2d 902 ).

1999The plaintiffs failed to show the existence of a factual question regarding the basis of their claim to Section 3, and in the absence of a valid claim of right, the mere possession of land gives no title (see, Soukup v Nardone, 212 AD2d 772 ).

1996Credit Corp., 172 AD2d 824 ; Bayside Fuel Oil Depot Corp. v Savino Oil & Heating Co., 133 AD2d 658 ).

1996Credit Corp., 172 AD2d 824 ; Bayside Fuel Oil Depot Corp. v Savino Oil & Heating Co., 133 AD2d 658 ).

1996Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the plaintiff’s motion for an order of seizure since the plaintiff established both a likelihood of success in the action and the absence of a valid defense to its claim (see, CPLR 7102 [c], [d]; Bendat v Premier Broadcast Group, 175 AD2d 536 ; Theodore & Theodore Assocs. v A.I.

1990In any event, even in the absence of a valid waiver of the statutory claim, we note that fully 126 days of the delay are attributable to defendant, and that less than six months of delay are attributed to the People, evincing that both the statutory and constitutional claims for delay are without merit (People v Friscia, 51 NY2d 845 ).

1989This section must be read in conjunction with UCC 4-213 (1) which recites the rules for ascertaining when an "item” (see, UCC 4-104 [1] [g]) is "finally paid”, and provides that upon final payment the payor bank shall be accountable for the amount of the item (see, Fromer Distribs. v Bankers Trust Co., 36 AD2d 840 ).

1984Co., 47 NY2d 12, 21 .) Accordingly, the order, Supreme Court, New York County (Seymour Schwartz, J.), which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss so much of the complaint as sought punitive damages and attorneys’ fees, should be reversed to the extent appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motion granted, and the complaint dismissed only to the extent plaintiff seeks to recover punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.