From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robbins v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 21, 1969
32 A.D.2d 1047 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

July 21, 1969


Order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated November 26, 1968, modified, on the law and the facts, by striking therefrom the decretal provision which denied the motion to cancel the lis pendens and substituting therefor a provision granting said relief. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. On August 1, 1968, appellants moved, inter alia, to cancel the lis pendens filed by plaintiff on July 30, 1965, on the ground that more than three years had elapsed since the filing thereof and no extension had been obtained. Special Term denied the motion in the exercise of its discretion. We are of the opinion that this was error. Under CPLR 6513 an unextended notice of pendency has a life span of three years. The section is self-executing and failure to obtain an extension results in the death of the notice ( Carvel-Dari Freeze Stores v. Lukon, 219 N.Y.S.2d 716). CPLR 6514, which provides for cancellation of a notice of pendency of action, contains no direct provision for canceling a notice which is more than three years old and has not been renewed. We are of the opinion that inherent in the language of CPLR 6514 is a mandate to the courts to direct the cancellation of a notice of pendency which is more than three years old and has not been extended. The granting of such a motion is not subject to the court's discretion and the court must cancel a notice of pendency where it is established that the notice is more than three years old and has not been extended. Rabin, Acting P.J., Benjamin, Munder, Martuscello and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Robbins v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 21, 1969
32 A.D.2d 1047 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

Robbins v. Goldstein

Case Details

Full title:NATHAN ROBBINS, as Trustee, Respondent, v. FRANCES GOLDSTEIN et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 21, 1969

Citations

32 A.D.2d 1047 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
303 N.Y.S.2d 822

Citing Cases

Patterson v. Raquette Realty, LLC

The extension, however, must be requested prior to the expiration of the prior notice (see id.). This is an…

In the Matter of Sakow

This is an exacting rule; a "notice of pendency that has expired without extension is a nullity" (13…