N.Y. REAL PROP. ACTS. LAW § 1955 (McKinney's 2009). See also DiPietro v. County of Westchester, 237 A.D.2d 325, 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997) (finding that the effect of a restriction on the use of property as a public park set forth in a deed of property by the County of Westchester, a subdivision of New York State, could not be extinguished as a result of RPAPL § 1955(5)). "RPAPL § 1951 and § 1955 were enacted simultaneously, supporting the theory that the sections are to be read together.

Therefore, RPAPL 1953 (4) applies here. The import of RPAPL 1953 (4) is that plaintiffs right of reentry and defendant's forfeiture of the property were automatic upon defendant's breach of the condition ( see DiPietro v County of Westchester, 237 AD2d 325). In opposition, defendant failed to raise an issue of fact as to the validity of the condition subsequent.

Thus, to the extent that the statute excludes a condition subsequent created in a conveyance that is for "benevolent, charitable, educational, public or religious purposes" (RPAPL 1953), it permits the automatic exercise of a right of entry that was otherwise permitted by the common law. This interpretation of RPAPL 1953 was adopted in DiPietro v County of Westchester ( 237 AD2d 325 [2d Dept 1997]). Contrary to defendant's argument, in the absence of a contrary First Department case, this case is binding authority on this court.