Forman Constr., Inc. v. P.D.F. Constr., 2016–11592
| Decision Date | 25 September 2019 |
| Docket Number | Index No. 8122/08,2016–11592 |
| Citation | 175 A.D.3d 1491,109 N.Y.S.3d 453 |
| Parties | FORMAN CONSTRUCTION, INC., Appellant, v. P.D.F. CONSTRUCTION, et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
175 A.D.3d 1491
109 N.Y.S.3d 453
FORMAN CONSTRUCTION, INC., Appellant,
v.
P.D.F. CONSTRUCTION, et al., Respondents.
2016–11592
Index No. 8122/08
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Argued - May 14, 2019
September 25, 2019
Scott A. Rosenberg, P.C., Garden City Park, N.Y. (Kenneth J. Pagliughi of counsel), for appellant.
Tsunis Gasparis LLP, Islandia, N.Y. (Maria Gasparis of counsel), for respondents.
LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., JOHN M. LEVENTHAL, SHERI S. ROMAN, ROBERT J. MILLER, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Julianne T. Capetola, J.), entered July 5, 2016. The order granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The plaintiff contractor performed certain construction work on property owned by the defendants Pier D'Alessandro and Debra D'Alessandro. Pier D'Alessandro does business as P.F.D. Construction, incorrectly sued herein as P.D.F. Construction, which hired the plaintiff. After a dispute arose, the plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for breach of contract and in quantum meruit. The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that the plaintiff was unlicensed at the time it performed the work and, accordingly, it forfeited its right to recover under any legal theory. The Supreme Court granted the defendants' motion, and the plaintiff appeals.
Where a home improvement contractor is not properly licensed in the municipality where the work is performed at the time the work is performed, the contractor forfeits the right to recover for the work performed, both under the contract and on a quantum meruit basis (see B & F Bldg. Corp. v. Liebig , 76 N.Y.2d 689, 693, 563 N.Y.S.2d 40, 564 N.E.2d 650 ; Graciano Corp. v. Baronoff , ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brightside Home Improvements, Inc. v. Ne. Home Improvement Servs.
...meruit basis (see B & F Bldg. Corp. v. Liebig, 76 N.Y.2d 689, 563 N.Y.S.2d 40, 564 N.E.2d 650 ; Forman Constr., Inc. v. P.D.F. Constr., 175 A.D.3d 1491, 1492, 109 N.Y.S.3d 453 ; Holistic Homes, LLC v. Greenfield, 138 A.D.3d 689, 690, 27 N.Y.S.3d 892 ; Graciano Corp. v. Baronoff, 106 A.D.3d ......
-
Strickani v. Hertz Vehicles LLC
... ... 850 [2d; Dept. 2020]; Shah v Exxis, ... Inc., 138 A.D.3d 970, 971 [2d Dept. 2016]; Leon v ... ...
-
Flores v. Rubenstein, 2018–09650
...that the defendant[ ] breached a duty owed to the plaintiff and that the defendant['s] negligence was a proximate cause of the alleged 175 A.D.3d 1491 injuries" ( Montalvo v. Cedeno, 170 A.D.3d 1166, 1167, 96 N.Y.S.3d 638 ). "Although a plaintiff need not demonstrate the absence of his or h......
- People v. Picciochi