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

1,746 chars

defendant other than Stable, this cause of action must be dismissed, since they are not parties to
the proprietary lease. Because defendants do not otherwise attack this cause of action, this Court
does not dismiss the balance of it on substantive grounds. With respect to this cause of action, as
well as the fourth cause of action, which has the same factual underpinnings, including that
Peterson's October 7, 2015 letter to plaintiffs' counsel advised that the Board would not approve
any part of the plan that subjected Stable to the requirements of Local Law 11 (Amended 2017
complaint, ¶ 57), this Court notes that, although none of the parties discusses the substance
of Local Law 11 in detail, its applicability is doubtful. Spitzer indicated in his letter to the Board
that, because the two proposed rooftop mezzanine levels constituted two additional floors, they,
together with the building's existing lower four floors, would amount to a six-story building, and,
hence, fall within the purview of Local Law 11. However, Local Law 11 provides that it applies
to buildings having more than six floors. See n 6, supra.

Mandatory Injunction Approving Dogwood LLC's Plans and Executing the
Applications

The amended 2017 complaint's fourth cause of action is based on "[d]efendants[']" alleged
breaches of the proprietary lease under the third cause of action and seeks, on behalf of
"[p]laintiffs" a mandatory injunction compelling the Board, on Stable's behalf, to approve
Dogwood LLC's plans and to execute the necessary documents, including applications to the
DOB, Landmarks Preservation Committee, and to the New York City Fire Department.
Amended 2017 complaint, ¶159. Preliminarily, Stable has failed to establish that any issue