Call us toll free 0800 1800 900

Find us on Map
info@colbertlaw.ooftheb.com
Login

Login
Colbert Law
  • Please attach a menu to this menu location in Appearance > Menu.

Court Compels Coop and Shareholder to have Virtual Hearing on Attorney Fee Award

Home UpshotCourt Compels Coop and Shareholder to have Virtual Hearing on Attorney Fee Award
Court Compels Coop and Shareholder to have Virtual Hearing on Attorney Fee Award

Court Compels Coop and Shareholder to have Virtual Hearing on Attorney Fee Award

September 8, 2020 Posted by Team Colbert Law Upshot

Justice Lebovits of the Supreme Court, New York County, just decided that a cooperative shareholder who is facing an award of legal fees against him, must appear at a virtual hearing on the amount of the legal fee award.  The cooperative at One West 64th Street in Manhattan won the case and the Court decided that the shareholder’s continued seeking books and records in the lawsuit was in bad faith and warranted an award of legal fees to the coop under the proprietary lease.

After Covid-19, an in person hearing was not possible.  The coop pressed on and wanted a virtual hearing on the attorney fees award. The motion practice proceeded, resulting in Justice Lebovits’ decision on September 4, 2020.  The Court recognized that:

This court is aware of only one New York case addressing the issue of virtual hearings since the beginning of the pandemic. In A.S. v N.S., Justice Tandra L. Dawson of Supreme Court, New York County, carefully considered the issue and held that under the circumstances of the case before her (a contentious custody dispute), holding a virtual hearing was feasible, fair, and preferable to further postponing trial. (See 2020 NY Slip Op 20161 [Sup Ct, NY County July 1, 2020].)

Justice Lebovits agreed with that conclusion and ordered a virtual hearing.  According to the Court:

Judiciary Law § 2-b (3) confers power on this court “to devise and make new process and [*3]forms of proceedings, necessary to carry into effect the powers and jurisdiction possessed by it.” This statutory provision “explicitly authorize[s] the courts’ use of innovative procedures where “necessary to carry into effect the powers and jurisdiction possessed by” the court. (People v Wrotten, 14 NY3d 33, 37 [2009] [internal quotation marks omitted].)

Read the decision here.

0
Share

About Team Colbert Law

Colbert Law is a New York and Connecticut law firm specializing in community association (condo, coop, HOA) general representation, litigation, real estate, business law, tax controversies and audits. We represent our clients in a cost effective way. Contact us at 646.216.2199

You also might be interested in

Conflicts of Interest will be Problematic for Board Members unless Handled Properly

Conflicts of Interest will be Problematic for Board Members unless Handled Properly

Mar 27, 2020

Back in 2015, a condo board president's toilet repeatedly leaked[...]

New Requirements for NY Coops & Incorporated Condos regarding Board Member Conflicts of Interest

New Requirements for NY Coops & Incorporated Condos regarding Board Member Conflicts of Interest

Nov 24, 2017

A new law (effective January 1, 2018) was just passed unanimously by[...]

Management Transitions – The Management Agreement – Automatic Renewal Provisions

Management Transitions – The Management Agreement – Automatic Renewal Provisions

Sep 22, 2019

 

CONTACT US

New York Office

28 Liberty Street, 6th Floor
New York, New York 10005

646.880.3000

Connecticut Office

55 Post Road W, 2nd Floor
Westport, Connecticut 06880

203.349.8100

Contact Us

We're currently offline. Send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Send Message
Experience something completely different. The most powerful theme ever. Button Example

© 2026 · Your Website. Theme by HB-Themes.

Prev Next