Judgments [money and real]

CPLR 211

CPLR 5203

CPLR 5014

Guerra v Crescent St. Corp., 2014 NY Slip Op 05948 [2nd Dept. 2014]

"Since a money judgment is viable for 20 years, but a lien on real property is only effective for 10 years (see CPLR 211[b]; 5203[a]), the Legislature enacted CPLR 5014 to allow a judgment creditor to apply for a renewal of the lien by commencing an action for a renewal judgment" (Schiff Food Prods., Co, Inc., v M & M Import Export, 84 AD3d 1346, 1347-1348; see Gletzer v Harris, 12 NY3d 468, 473; Rose v Gulizia, 104 AD3d 757, 757-758; Premier Capital, LLC v Best Traders, Inc., 88 AD3d 677, 678). "Pursuant to CPLR 5014(1), an action upon a money judgment may be maintained between the original parties where ten years have elapsed since the judgment was originally docketed" (Pangburn v Klug, 244 AD2d 394, 395; see Premier Capital, LLC v Best Traders, Inc., 88 AD3d at 678). Thus, an action for a renewal judgment is not time-barred even when it is commenced more than 10 years after the original judgment was docketed (see Schiff Food Prods. Co., Inc. v M & M Import Export, 84 AD3d at 1348).

Here, instead of commencing a new action, as required by CPLR 5014, the plaintiff moved in the instant, original action to renew the judgment lien. In view of the plaintiff's failure to commence a new action and thereby satisfy the procedural requirement of CPLR 5014, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of her motion which was to renew the judgment lien on the subject property.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s