Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. Shuts Down Prior Partners’ Suit For Lost Profits in Record Time
Under New York law, a notice of pendency is a powerful provisional remedy afforded to plaintiffs claiming an interest in real property. Once a notice of pendency is filed against a property, it makes it virtually impossible for the owners of that property to sell it or obtain a mortgage. The enormous leverage wielded by plaintiffs who file a notice of pendency cannot be understated. However, this power is not without limits. As a recent case handled by Adam Leitman Bailey P.C. attorneys demonstrates, the improper filing of a notice of pendency can backfire against the filer.
After being sued for over $2 million by two plaintiffs claiming to have been shut out of two decades’ worth of profits from a real estate investment property in the Fort George neighborhood of Manhattan, a longtime Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. client – a landlord with a sizable portfolio – turned to Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys for assistance. Concurrently with the lawsuit, the plaintiffs filed a notice of pendency against the property in an effort to frustrate potential buyers of the property.
After assessing the complaint and related documents, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys quickly realized that the prior partners’ claims for lost profits, despite having considerable merit, were outside of the statute of limitations. Although it is difficult to win on a pre-answer motion to dismiss, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C.’s attorneys did just that, successfully arguing that all eight of the plaintiffs’ causes of actions were barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
Armed with a dismissal victory, Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys demanded that the plaintiffs cancel the notice of pendency forthwith or face paying for the damages the client incurred from the loss of two potential sales as a result of the notice of pendency. The plaintiffs obstinately refused to cancel the notice of pendency and Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys ramped-up the pressure by moving for cancellation of the notice of pendency and to set the matter down for a hearing to determine the client’s damages and attorney’s fees.
At oral argument on the motion to cancel the notice of pendency, the judge offered the plaintiffs an ultimatum: either file an amended complaint within two weeks or the case will be dismissed with prejudice. The judge also warned plaintiffs that they run the risk of a countersuit for damages incurred by the client for the loss of two potential sales of the property. With mounting pressure from the court and from Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorneys, the plaintiffs caved, signing a settlement agreement agreeing to release the client from all claims relating to the real estate investment.
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. prevailed on the matter in record time, obtaining dismissal less than two months after plaintiffs’ filed their complaint in the action.
Adam Leitman Bailey, P.C. attorney secured the win and negotiated the settlement on behalf of the client.