Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Children's Magical Garden, Inc. v. Norfolk Street Development, LLC, NYLJ 7/16/18, p. 18., col. 1, AppDiv, First Dept. (Opinion by Tom, J; concurring opinion by Friedman, J.P.)
In an action by operators of a community garden to establish title by adverse possession, record title holder appealed from Supreme Court's denial of its motion to dismiss. The Appellate Division affirmed, holding that the complaint adequately alleged continuous possession under a claim of right.
The complaint alleges that beginning in 1985, neighborhood activists began to clear debris from the subject corner lot in lower Manhattan and began planting trees, shrubs and vegetables. The complaint alleges that the activists erected a chain link fence around the garden, and that only members of the unincorporated association of activists had keys that would unlock the gate. The complaint also alleges that members permitted various school and community events to take place in the garden. In 1999, representatives of the garden's record owner entered the premises, tore down part of the fence, chopped down a tree and damaged a children's clubhouse. Members of the unincorporated association immediately removed the makeshift fence erected by record owner's representatives, and repaired the damage. In 2012, members of the association incorporated. Record title to the garden parcel had changed hands several times, and in 2014, the current record owner filed an application to build a six-story residential building on the lot, prompting the now-incorporated association to bring this action seeking a declaration that it has acquired title to the parcel by adverse possession. Supreme Court denied record owner's motion to dismiss, and record owner appealed.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.