What's New

Recent Articles

Defective Conveyor Belt Guarding
Child Custody and Home State Jurisdiction
The Negative Impact of the Home Equity Theft Prevention Act On Legitimate Investors and Lenders

Significant Verdicts and Settlements

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. get a big win against the New York State Department of Corrections in an Article 78 case.

In this proceeding, petitioner, an inmate presently located at Washington Correctional Facility, seeks a review of respondent's determination to transfer petitioner. Respondent opposes the application.

Petitioner was received by the Department of Correctional Services on August 14, 2007, at which time has began serving his 4 year sentence of incarceration at Ulster Correctional Facility. On October 18, 2007, petitioner was accepted into the Ulster Correctional Facility Cadre Program. Upon acceptance into the program, petitioner contends that he signed a contract in which he was promised that upon succesful completion of the program he would not be transferred outside of the "Sullivan County Hub," which consists of eight correctional facilities located in Sullivan, Ulster and Orange Counties.

After petitioner succesfully completed the Cadre Program, he was transferred on January 15, 2009 to Mid-Orange Correctional Facility, which is within the Sullivan Hub.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED, that the petition is granted to the extent of remmiting this matter to respondent for consideration of petitioner's request for transfer within the Sullivan Hub, specifically Wallkill Correctional Facility, for a determination of thirty (30) days of the date of this Decision, Order and Judgement.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. settle finger injury case for $450,000.00 after commencing trial in the Eastern District of New York.

In the matter of Gomez v. J.R. Hycee Conveyor Co., Inc., CV 06-2827, after commencing trial and the jury having heard the testimony of the Plaintiff, the Defendants settled the matter for $450,000.00.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. obtain dismissal of case against principals of corporate tenant on appeal.

When a landlord brought suit against commercial tenants and various individuals and companies for breach of lease, all the Defendants retained the Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. to represent them. Our office successfully obtained a dismissal of six of the seven causes of action in the Supreme Court. The one remaining cause of action was to hold individual principals of the corporate tenant liable for removing the fixtures of the tenant from the premises.

Our office appealed from the Supreme Court’s decision to leave in that remaining cause of action, arguing that a corporate principal has no liability for the corporation unless that liability is intentionally superseded and in any event, there is no liability for individuals removing things that belong to the tenant itself. The Appellate Division agreed and dismissed the remaining cause of action.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. Obtain Justice for Home Owners - Jury Finds Home Owners are Entitled to Damages for A Contractor’s Willful Exaggeration

In the matter of Turbo Carpentry Corp. v. Ralph Brancadoro and Luigina Brancadoro, a contractor brought an action against the homeowners to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. The contractors claimed that the homeowners breached a reconstruction contract by allegedly failing to pay the contractor in full for the work performed. The homeowners retained the Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. to represent them. Our firm brought a counterclaim for willful exaggeration of the mechanic’s lien and a counterclaim for failing to perform the reconstruction of the premises in a workmanlike manner.

On January 17, 2007, after a thirteen day trial in which Thomas Weiss, Esq. represented the homeowners, a jury denied the contractor’s claims and awarded the home owners $67,107.29 for willful exaggeration of the mechanic’s lien, $80,000.00 in attorney’s fees and $2,500.00 for failing to perform the reconstruction of the premises in a workmanlike manner.

The contractor was hired to reconstruct the home owner’s premises after a fire caused a substantial amount of damage to it. At trial, the contractor claimed that it wasn’t paid for its profit, overhead and taxes. Mr. Weiss proved to the jury that the contractor was paid in full for all of the work it performed, which included the profit, overhead and taxes, based on testimony elicited from the president and foreman of the Plaintiff company as well as certain documentary evidence. Mr. Weiss also proved that at the time that the contractor filed its mechanic’s lien, the contractor knew that it was paid in full and that the amount set forth in the lien was intentionally and deliberately exaggerated and was not the result of an honest mistake. After hearing the evidence, the jury agreed and punished the Contractor by awarding damages for the willful exaggeration.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. successfully obtain dismissal of overcharge case against Landlord.

In the matter of Peterson v. Winkler, 103946/05 (N.Y. Co.), the Plaintiff brought a lawsuit against Valerie Winkler, the legal tenant of a rent-stabilized apartment in Manhattan. Mr. Peterson was Ms. Winkler’s sub-tenant by permission of the building management. Mr. Peterson had claimed that he was overcharged for rent while he subleased from Ms. Winkler and sought reimbursement of the alleged overcharge and treble damages. Ms. Winkler had retained the Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. to represent her. Thomas Weiss, Esq. had argued that the Plaintiff was unable to meet his burden of proof and that pursuant to NYC Code § 26-516 (a), the tenant should have first commenced an action before the State Division of Community Renewal (“DHCR”). Falling short of that, the Defendant is entitled to a dismissal of the complaint.

In dismissing the case, the Supreme Court agreed (Hon. Marilyn J. Diamond) stating that the DHCR has primary jurisdiction and that the matter should not have been brought in the Supreme Court in the first instance.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. successfully obtains dismissal of case against individual employees of Marcus & Millichap Real Estate Investment Brokerage Company of New York.

Our office brought suit on behalf of Marcus & Millichap Real Estate Investment Brokerage Company of New York for breach of a real estate brokerage commission against an individual by the name of Michael Porges. Mr. Porges brought a third-party action against various individual brokers and the regional manager of Marcus & Millichap REIBC who were involved in the transaction. We sought dismissal of the case, arguing amongst other things, that agents of a company may not be held liable for the alleged acts of a disclosed principal when the agents were acting within the scope of their duty.

The Supreme Court (Hon. Louis B. York) agreed and threw out the third-party complaint.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. successfully obtains of judgment from the Supreme Court reversing a foreclosure sale

In the matter of WMC Mortgage Corp. v. G. Aguilar, the defendant worked out and effectuated a mortgage modification between himself and WMC Mortgage’s servicer, Litton Loan Servicing, LP prior to a foreclosure sale. Although the home owner complied with the terms set forth in the loan modification, through sheer neglect or lack of communication, his premises was foreclosed upon. The homeowners retained the Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. to represent him. Our firm brought a motion requesting a reversal of the foreclosure sale and the setting aside of the default judgment that was entered against the home owner.

On September 12, 2010, the Supreme Court of Bronx County issued a decision setting aside the foreclosure sale on the basis that the WMC engaged in “fraud, collusion, mistake or misconduct” which casted suspicion to the fairness of the sale. Liberty Savings Bank, GSB v. Knab, 722 N.Y.S.2d 178 (2nd Dept. 2001). The Supreme Court determined that since the home owner relied on the bank’s promise to modify his loan, WMC should have been estopped from foreclosing on the home owner’s premises. Due to Bank’s failure to honor the loan modification with the home owner, the Supreme Court granted the motion and reversed, vacated and set aside the foreclosure sale.

WMC v. Aguilar Decision

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. successfully obtains a dismissal and discharge of a notice of sale and lien on personal property

n this proceeding, respondent was attempting to auction a certain motor vehicle in a public sale to satisfy storage fees that it claimed the Petitioner owed. Upon receiving a Notice of Sale and Lien for the vehicle, Petitioners immediately retained the Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. to fight to dismiss and discharge the lien and sale.

Petitioner is the owner of the certain motor vehicle. It was given permission to store the motor vehicle at a facility that it worked with. A few years later, Petitioner learned that the vehicle had been towed to a storage facility by the Respondent. It was Respondent’s allegations that it had the authority to tow and store the vehicle from the facility that the vehicle was parked with. Petitioner failed to receive notice that the facility had authorized for the vehicle to be towed or that Respondent was storing the vehicle.

The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. filed a petition with the Supreme Court of Nassau County seeking to dismiss and discharge the lien and sale.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court granted the petition and the lien and sale was discharged and dismissed on the basis that respondent had failed to obtain authorization from an authorized agent of the Petitioner. Petitioner was granted possession of his motor vehicle without cost to Respondents towards its claim of storage fees.

New York has now become a No-Fault State for Divorce
Effective October 12, 2010, the Domestic Relations Act concerning divorce was amended to no fault divorce by adding the ground of irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. This new addition to the matrimonial law allows for one spouse, unilaterally, to conclude that he or she want out of the marriage and will be able to obtain a judgment for divorce whether or not the other spouse agrees to end the marriage or if the other spouse was guilty of any marital misconduct.

Although this new law prevents several issues that would likely arise under the various six other grounds for divorce, there still remains issues that would need to be resolved under the new law. The Thomas Weiss & Associates, P.C. has become fully familiarized with this new law and is proficient in representing its clients in resolving any issues that may arise under same and in ultimately obtaining a judgment of divorce that would best benefit the client.