Thermal Design, Inc. v. Gorman

OPINION OF THE COURT

Howard Miller, J.

The petition is granted to the following extent.

*520The following facts are undisputed. On August 23, 1993, petitioner filed a notice of mechanic’s lien; on August 19, 1994 respondent received an extension of the lien for filing pursuant to Lien Law § 17. Sometime thereafter respondent returned the documents to petitioner because a filing fee of $15 was not tendered and the document was not notarized or acknowledged.

Petitioner now seeks a nunc pro tune order directing the respondent to accept the extension for filing.

Had the lien lapsed, this court would be…