Braverman Greenspun partner Michael Savino secured a ruling from the New York County Supreme Court in favor of his client, a Murray Hill condominium, in a RPAPL § 881 proceeding. A neighboring building began a project that involved the demolition, renovation, and expansion of its premises. In order to do so, the neighboring building was required to install waterproofing and protections on the condo. An inspection of the prior work done on the project revealed that the waterproofing work, already applied to the condo’s property by the neighbor, raised a number of concerns. This work was done without permission or an agreement as to protocols. The neighboring building trespassed on the condo’s property and improperly applied waterproofing material to their real property without their consent.
Negotiations fell apart between the two buildings regarding the project, so the building conducting the project (the petitioner) filed a RPAPL § 881 proceeding in order to gain access to the condo’s (respondent) adjacent premises to perform work including installing, maintaining, and removing temporary overhead protection over a portion of the driveway and terrace and installing waterproofing on a portion of the exterior wall. Since the initial waterproofing application was deemed to be insufficient and did not meet the requirements of the manufacturer’s warranty, the New York County Supreme Court ruled that the petitioner must complete the waterproofing to the respondent’s satisfaction and in compliance with the manufacturer’s warranty.
The Court also ruled that the petitioner negotiated in bad faith and must reimburse the condo for any professional fees incurred because of the project, as well as partial attorneys’ fees. Additionally, the Court ordered the petitioner to pay the respondent a monthly license fee while the project is being completed.
A copy of the decision can be found here.