Legal Opinion
In the Matter of Delilah Rigano v. Vibar Construction
New York Court of Appeals
Decided December 19, 2014No. 223PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Chief Judge Lippman.
The issue on this appeal is whether a notice of mechanic’s lien can be amended nunc pro tunc to reflect the name of the true owner of the property or whether the misnomer invalidates the lien. Here, the true owner is the sole shareholder of the listed owner, the conveyance of the property in question from the listed owner to the true owner was not at arm’s length, and the public and certainly the true owner here were on notice that a lien had been placed on the property. The subject notice of lien also provided means for third parties to contact the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Church E. Gates & Co. v. National Fair & Exposition Ass'nNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Niagara Venture v. Sicoli & Massaro, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Tri-State Sol-Aire Corp. v. Lakeville Pace Mechanical, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- PM Contracting Co. v. 32 AA Associates LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
3Cited by4 opinions
- KSK Construction Group, LLC v. 26 East 64th Street, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of Rigano v. Vibar Constr., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Matter of Vanguard Constr. & Dev. Co. v. 400 Times Sq. Assoc., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2025
- Vanguard Constr. & Dev. Co., Inc. v. 400 Times Sq. Assoc., LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2025