Opinion
November 16, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.).
Plaintiff does not dispute that it did not have the home improvement license required by law when it performed the work on which this action was based. (Administrative Code of City of New York § 20-387 [a].) Strict compliance with the licensing requirement is mandatory. (Millington v Rapoport, 98 A.D.2d 765, 766.) Where the contractor was not licensed when the work was done, it cannot recover, even if it subsequently obtained renewal of its license. (Hammerman v Jamco Indus., 119 A.D.2d 544, 545.)
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Ellerin, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.