Opinion
Appeal No. 14938 14939 14939A Index No. 161780/19 Case No. 2020-04267 2020-04284 2021-00314
12-28-2021
In the Matter of Able Rigging Contractors, Inc., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gemini Machine Works, Inc., Respondent-Respondent. Appeal No. 14938-14939-14939A Case Nos. 2020-04267, 2020-04284, 2021-00314
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, White Plains (Karen H. Tommer of counsel), for appellant.
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, White Plains (Karen H. Tommer of counsel), for appellant.
Before: Webber, J.P., Mazzarelli, Gesmer, González, Rodriguez, JJ.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered August 6, 2020 and January 22, 2021, which denied the petition to vacate respondent's demand for a verified statement pursuant to Lien Law § 76(1) and directed petitioner to produce the verified statement, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the matter remanded for further proceedings in accordance herewith. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered September 28, 2020, which denied petitioner's motion for reargument, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as taken from a nonappealable order.
Lien Law § 76(1) entitles "[a]ny beneficiary of the trust holding a trust claim" to either examine the contents of the trustee's books or records or obtain a verified statement of the books or records. The court erred in denying the petition without determining whether respondent is a beneficiary under the statute (see Innovative Drywall v Crown Plastering Corp., 224 A.D.2d 664, 664 [2d Dept 1996], lv dismissed 88 N.Y.2d 1016 [1996]). Accordingly, we remand the matter for consideration of that issue.
No appeal lies from the denial of a motion for reargument (CURE [Citizens United Reciprocal Exch.] v Mian, 195 A.D.3d 564 [1st Dept 2021]).