Legal Opinion
191 Chrystie LLC v. Ledoux
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 31, 2011PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*682The law of the case doctrine “is inapplicable where, as here, a summary judgment motion follows a motion to dismiss” (see Riddick v City of New York, 4 AD3d 242, 245 [2004]). Our holding in relation to the prior motion to dismiss was based on the facts and law presented by the parties in that procedural posture, and no more. Supreme Court correctly held that 29 RCNY 2-09 (b) (3) (i) governs, as between prime tenant and landlord, the determination of “covered” status under the Loft Law (see Matter of 97 Wooster Corp. v New York City Loft Bd., 56 AD3d 331, 332 [2008]). We agree that defendant…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Riddick v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- J.D. Realty Associates v. ShanleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Jerulee Co. v. SanchezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
3Cited by17 opinions
- Moses v. SavedoffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Rosen v. MosbyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- Borawski v. AbulafiaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Martinez v. Paddock Chevrolet, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Alvarado v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.