Department of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. of the City of New York v Living Waters Realty Inc.

[*1] Department of Hous. Preserv. & Dev. of the City of New York v Living Waters Realty Inc. 2008 NY Slip Op 52156(U) [21 Misc 3d 132(A)] Decided on October 28, 2008 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on October 28, 2008
APPELLATE TERM OF THE SUPREME COURT, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: DAVIS, J.P., SCHOENFELD, HEITLER, JJ
.

Department of Housing Preservation and Development of the City of New York, Petitioner-Respondent, 570469/07

against

Living Waters Realty Inc. and Harriet Thomas, Respondents, 59 West 128 Holding, LLC and Meyer Adler, Non-party Appellants (New Owners).

Appellants 59 West 128 Holding, LLC and Meyer Adler appeal from so much of an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, New York County (Gilbert Badillo, J.), dated April 3, 2007, as denied their cross motion to "remove" a judgment entered as a lien against real property in an action for civil penalties, without prejudice to renew.

Per Curiam.

Order (Gilbert Badillo, J.), dated April 3, 2007, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs.

Petitioner, Department of Housing Preservation and Development of the City of New York (HPD), commenced this enforcement proceeding in 2004 against the named respondents, former owners of the subject building premises. During the pendency of the proceeding, the building was conveyed to appellants. Thereafter, in December 2006, HPD obtained a judgment for civil penalties, which was docketed as a lien against the building premises. Appellants, as the current owners, seek to "remove the judgment," contending that the civil penalties could not serve as a basis for a lien on the property since they were based on the conduct of the prior owners.

The judgment for civil penalties was properly docketed as a lien on the premises and appellants have shown no basis for the removal of the lien. "When the department [HPD] obtains a determination in an action [for civil penalties] against an owner, judgment may be entered against the premises which shall constitute a lien" (Administrative Code of the City of New York § 27-2116[d]). Inasmuch as HPD filed the notice of pendency prior to the transfer of [*2]ownership (see Multiple Dwelling Law § 308; Administrative Code of the City of New York § 27-2113[a]), appellants are bound by all proceedings taken in this matter after such filing to the same extent as if they were a party (see CPLR 6501; CCA 209[d]).

We have considered and rejected appellant's remaining arguments.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Decision Date: October 28, 2008