A recent decision from the Appellate Division, First Department has upheld breach of fiduciary duty and breach of contract claims brought by a condominium unit owner against the Condominium’s (the “Condominium’s”) Board of Managers (the “Board”). Adam Leitman Bailey P.C.’s client, the owner of a condominium apartment in Manhattan, commenced an action against the Board in connection with the Board’s failure to address the client’s constant complaints related to dirty and hazardous water (the “Supreme Court Action”). These issues have deprived the client of the ability to bathe in her apartment for over two (2) years. Shortly after the Complaint was served, the Board filed a Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) seeking to dismiss all four of the client’s causes of action. In the Motion, the Board argued that the client, among other things, failed to include sufficient factual allegations that were otherwise required to show that the Board was on notice of the plumbing issues in her apartment.
Upon receiving a copy of the Motion, Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. immediately sprung into action and vigorously defended the client against the Board’s claims. First, Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. compiled mountains of evidence in the form of emails and formal letters showing that Board, through the Condominium’s managing agent and other employees, was on notice of the plumbing issues shortly after the client purchased the condominium apartment back in the Fall of 2018. After compiling all the necessary evidence, Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. then conducted an additional, in-depth review of the Condominium’s governing documents to show that the Board is responsible for performing plumbing-related repairs and was effectively put on notice of these issues over the years. Critically, Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. carefully crafted a detailed and bulletproof affidavit for its client to submit in opposition the Board’s Motion. Ultimately, while the Supreme Court found that the negligence and declaratory causes of action should be dismissed as duplicative of the breach of contract cause of action and the client had an adequate remedy at law, respectively, the Court nonetheless agreed with Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. and found that the breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty causes of action were adequately pled, as supplemented by the client’s affidavit, to survive dismissal.
Despite receiving this decision, the Board nonetheless filed an appeal with the First Department (the “Appeal”) seeking to challenge the Supreme Court’s determination. Again, Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. took immediate action to defend the Appeal. After fully briefing the Appeal by utilizing similar arguments brought in opposition to the Supreme Court Motion., Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. appeared before the First Department to argue against the Board’s Appeal. In less than a month after the parties argued the Appeal, the First Department came down with a notably perspicuous decision affirming the Supreme Court’s decision on the Motion.
As a result of Adam Leitman Bailey P.C.’s zealous advocacy and winning strategies in both the Supreme Court and First Department, the client can rest easy knowing that Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. will be able to continue fighting for her right to enjoy and use her apartment free of unclean and hazardous plumbing facilities.
Adam Leitman Bailey, John M. Desiderio, and William M. Pekarsky represent the client in all aspects of the Supreme Court Action while Jeffrey R. Metz handled and argued the Appeal and Brandon M. Zlotnick assisted with drafting the appellate brief.
Twitter