170 NY Props. LLC v. Edwards, 2024 NY Slip Op 24317 (2024)

Citation: 170 NY Props. LLC v. Edwards, 2024 NY Slip Op 24317 (2024)
Parent Document: 170 NY Props. LLC v. Edwards, 2024 NY Slip Op 24317 (2024)
Jurisdiction: New York (state)
Effective Date: 2024-12-11
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10292432/170-ny-props-llc-v-edwards/ ↗

Full Text

1,302 chars

It has long been recognized in the law of evidence that a letter properly mailed is presumed to have been received. (News Syndicate Co. v. Gatti Paper Stock Corp., 256 NY 211 [1931]; Dulberg v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of U.S., 277 NY 17 [1938].) Here, however, respondent's proof of mailing proves nothing. Some of the pages of the subpoenaed DHPD documents from the other proceeding are upside down, some pages are out of order, and on some pages the full text is cut off. Respondent's exhibit 13 contains an affidavit from an authorized DHPD representative, Anthony Forde who avers that DHPD's mailing vendor picks up certain cycles of violations. There is also a "notice of violation daily cycle job" which states "job ended successfully" and appears to be in reference to 75 violations. None of the violations are delineated by violation number or order number. Finally, nowhere in respondent's R13 could the [*8]court locate petitioner's mailing address. After meticulously sifting through R13 for 45 minutes, the court briefly perused respondent's R14 and found that it suffered from the same infirmities. Thus, respondent failed to prove that the notices of violation for Violation # 16005225, Order Number 567*, and Violation # 16014164, Order Number 567*, were mailed by DHPD to petitioner.

Other Sections in This Document (49)

Full Text