All Lundin PLLC Blogs

New York County Courthouse (Justices Borrok, Chan, Sohen, Crane, Masley, Ostrager, Reed and Schecter)

No Action Clause Does Not Bar Claims When Demand on the Clause’s Notice Party Would be Futile

On January 3, 2026, Justice Patel of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Axos Fin., Inc. v. Reception Purchaser, LLC, 2026 NY Slip Op. 50019(U), holding that a no action clause did not bar claims when a demand on the clause’s notice party would be futile . . . Continue reading No Action Clause Does Not Bar Claims When Demand on the Clause’s Notice Party Would be Futile

Appellate Division First Department Courthouse

Non-Party to Arbitration Bound by Decision Because They Were in Privity With a Party to the Arbitration

On January 13, 2026, the First Department issued a decision in Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. v. PEI Global Partners Holdings LLC, 2026 NY Slip Op. 00080, holding that a non-party to an arbitration was bound by the arbitration decision because they were in privity with a party to the arbitration . . . Continue reading Non-Party to Arbitration Bound by Decision Because They Were in Privity With a Party to the Arbitration

Appellate Division First Department Courthouse

Claim for Breach of CMBS PSA Time Barred Under Borrowing Statute Based on Location of Special Servicer

On January 15, 2026, the First Department issued a decision in Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. UBS AG, 2026 NY Slip Op. 00221, holding that a a claim for breach of a CMBS PSA was time-barred under New York’s borrowing statute based on the location of the special servicer . . . Continue reading Claim for Breach of CMBS PSA Time Barred Under Borrowing Statute Based on Location of Special Servicer

New York County Courthouse (Justices Borrok, Chan, Sohen, Crane, Masley, Ostrager, Reed and Schecter)

Motion to Seal Fails for Lack of Evidentiary Support

On October 26, 2025, Justice Masley of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Grace Holmes, Inc. v. Bourbon Sidecar LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op. 34888(U), denying a motion to seal because, among other things, of the failure to submit evidentiary support for the argument that the documents should be sealed . . . Continue reading Motion to Seal Fails for Lack of Evidentiary Support