2018 NY Slip Op 51958

Citation: 2018 NY Slip Op 51958
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Source verification: cross_accepted_sealed
Original Source: https://www.nycourts.gov/reporter/3dseries/2018/2018_51958.htm ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,766 chars

the Board, had the Apartment inspected, had repairs made to the elevator, issued the renovation
plans, hired an engineer, advised the Board of the Apartment's deficiencies, sought the Board's
consent to Dogwood LLC's renovation plans, and was the one which entered into the occupancy
agreement. Peterson affidavit in support of motion to dismiss amended 2017 complaint, exhibit
1, Amended 2017 complaint, ¶¶ 1, 4, 18, 24, 26, 31, 51, 52, 63, 68-70,133, 138, 139,
154, 159, 192. The amended 2017 complaint's allegation that Blumenfeld was interviewed by the
Board on February 12, 2014, and that the "Board approved Dogwood [LLC] and Blumenfeld as
"a purchaser on or about February 19, 2014" (id., ¶ 25 [(emphasis added]),
is irrelevant because he did not subsequently become a party to the proprietary lease, or, for that
matter, to the occupancy agreement, and the amended 2017 complaint continues to allege that
only Dogwood LLC was the proprietary lessee. Moreover, because the amended 2017 complaint
does not indicate when Blumenfeld transferred his contract with Ono to Dogwood LLC, the
complaint could simply be averring that Stable had advised, after interviewing Blumenfeld, that
[*11]it would approve the purchase of the shares by Blumenfeld
or, in the event he assigned the Ono contract to Dogwood LLC, it would approve the purchase by
that entity. In addition, Blumenfeld could not become the Apartment's subtenant or occupant
unless he were approved by the Board, as mandated by the occupancy agreement which, as the
amended 2017 complaint alleges, the Board required Dogwood LLC to sign (in April 2014)
because the "purchaser" was an LLC, rather than a person. Id., ¶ 26.

Even assuming that Blumenfeld is a member of Dogwood LLC, which the amended 2017