Falk v. Nassau Cnty.

• Decision Date: 21 August 2019
• Docket Number: Index No. 600868/17,2017–13305,2018–05977
• Citation: 106 N.Y.S.3d 347,175 A.D.3d 607
• Parties: Jeffrey P. FALK, etc., Appellant, v. NASSAU COUNTY, et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

175 A.D.3d 607
106 N.Y.S.3d 347

Jeffrey P. FALK, etc., Appellant,
v.
NASSAU COUNTY, et al., Respondents.

2017–13305
2018–05977
Index No. 600868/17

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Submitted—April 22, 2019
August 21, 2019

106 N.Y.S.3d 348

McLaughlin & Stern LLP, New York, N.Y. (Lee S. Shalov and Wade C. Wilkinson of counsel), for appellant.

Jared A. Kasschau, County Attorney, Mineola, N.Y. (Christi Marie Kunzig and Robert F. Van der Waag of counsel), for respondents.

ALAN D. SCHEINKMAN, P.J., JEFFREY A. COHEN, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

175 A.D.3d 607

In a putative class action, inter alia, for declaratory and injunctive relief, the plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Jeffrey S. Brown, J.), entered October 3, 2017, and (2) an order of the same court entered January 23, 2018. The order entered October 3, 2017, insofar as appealed from, (a) granted those branches of the defendants' motion which were pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss so much of the first cause of action as sought to compel the defendants to disgorge all fees collected pursuant to Nassau County Administrative Code § 6–33.0 from January 4, 2016, to the present, and to dismiss the second, third, and fourth causes of action, alleging unjust enrichment, conversion, and money had and received, respectively, and (b) denied the plaintiff's application for leave to amend the complaint. The order entered January 23, 2018, insofar as appealed from, upon reargument, adhered to the determination in the order entered October 3, 2017, granting those branches of the defendants' motion which were pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss so much of the first cause of action as sought to compel the defendants to disgorge all fees collected pursuant to Nassau County Administrative Code § 6–33.0 from January 4, 2016, to

106 N.Y.S.3d 349

the present, and to dismiss the second, third, and fourth causes of action.

ORDERED that the appeal from the order entered October 3, 2017, is dismissed, as the portion of that order denying the plaintiff's application for leave to amend the complaint is not appealable as of right and leave to appeal has not been granted (see CPLR 5701[a] ), and the remainder of the order has been superseded by the order entered January 23, 2018, made upon reargument; and it is further,

ORDERED that the order entered January 23, 2018, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

ORDERED that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants.

According to the complaint in this action, the plaintiff, Jeffrey P. Falk, purchased a home in Nassau County in 2016. He alleges that he paid a title company $1,255 to record his deed and mortgage with the County, $450 of which represented fees

175 A.D.3d 608

necessary to obtain two tax map certification letters from the County Clerk as required under Section 6–33.0 of the Nassau County Administrative Code (hereinafter NCAC).

In 2017, the plaintiff commenced this putative class action against the County and the Nassau County Department of Assessments (hereinafter together the defendants). The first cause of action sought a judgment declaring, inter alia, that the fees imposed pursuant to NCAC § 6–33.0 are excessive and not reasonably necessary to accomplish the defendants' responsibility to maintain the County's registry. The first cause of action also sought to compel the defendants to disgorge...