CPLR 6514 (C): Case Study

When a notice of pendency is cancelled pursuant to a motion under CPLR 6514, the CPLR 6514(C) allows for the court’s discretion and states that the court “may” award the aggrieved party “costs and expenses occasioned by the filing and cancellation, in addition to any costs of the action.” Id. Under subsection (b) of 6514, the court is empowered with discretionary authority as to determine whether the notice of pendency was brought in good faith or not, may cancel the notice of pendency if they determine it was not brought in good faith. Accordingly, when it is found the action was not brought in good faith, the court generally uses its discretion and awards costs and expenses. In No. 1 Funding Ctr., Inc. v. H & G Operating Corp., 48 A.D.3d 908, 909, 853 N.Y.S.2d 178, 180 (2008), the court held that the plaintiff commenced the action for specific performance and notice of pendency in bad faith, as they were unable to perform on the contract at the time, and therefore the cancellation was under the purview of 6514(b), and the defendant was entitled to costs and
Under 22 NYCRR 130-1.1 (“NYCRR”), the court may use its discretion to award any party in a civil action, reimbursement for any actual expenses or attorney’s fees reasonably incurred as well as additional sanctions, as a result of frivolous conduct. Id. Accordingly, if a notice of pendency is cancelled because the court used its “inherent power” under CPLR 6501, the aggrieved party may be entitled to a remedy under NYCRR, but relief must be requested and is not assumed. (See Congel v. Malfitano, 2009, 61 A.D.3d 807, 877 N.Y.S.2d 443 (2d Dep't) Appellate Division held that while they weren’t entitled to subsection (c) relief because it was cancelled under 6501, relief under NYCRR would have been applicable if