The opinion
Lex 54 Condominium v Eltech Indus., Inc.
2025 NY Slip Op 32901(U)
August 19, 2025
Supreme Court, New York County
Docket Number: Index No. 151902/2025
Judge: Emily Morales-Minerva
Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip
Op 30001(U), are republished from various New York
State and local government sources, including the New
York State Unified Court System's eCourts Service.
This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official
publication.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/20/2025 11:52 AM INDEX NO. 151902/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/20/2025
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
NEW YORK COUNTY
PRESENT: HON. EMILY MORALES-MINERVA PART 42M
Justice
----------------------X INDEX NO. 151902/2025
THE LEX 54 CONDOMINIUM, BY ITS BOARD OF
MOTION DATE 05/25/2025
MANAGERS,
Petitioner, MOTION SEQ. NO. 001
- V -
ELTECH INDUSTRIES, INC., UNITEC ELEVATOR DECISION + ORDER ON
COMPANY, AMERICAN ELEVATOR GROUP MOTION
Respondents.
----------------------X.
The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 3, 7
were read on this motion to/for DISCHARGE/CANCEL MECHANICS LIEN
APPEARANCES:
Rukab Brash LLC, New York, NY (Lindsay Anne Alfano, Esq.,
of counsel), for petitioner.
EMILY MORALES-MINERVA, J.S.C.
In this action, petitioner THE LEX 54 CONDOMINIUM, by its
Board of Managers, moves, by petition and order to show cause
(mot. seq. no. 001), to vacate, discharge, and cancel the
mechanic's lien filed against it by respondent ELTECH
INDUSTRIES, INC. 1 Respondents do not appear or submit
opposition.
For the reasons set forth below, the motion, by order to
show cause, is denied, and the petition is dismissed.
1 Petitioner alleges that, "upon information and belief, respondents Unitec Elevator
Company and American Elevator Group are successors to Eltech" (NYSCEF Doc. No. 004,
Memorandum in Support). However, petitioner does not submit documentary evidence, or
any other proof thereof, to support this allegation.
151902/2025 THE LEX 54 CONDOMINIUM, BY ITS BOARD OF MANAGERS vs. ELTECH Page 1 of 5
INDUSTRIES, INC. ET AL
Motion No. 001
[* 1] 1 of 5
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/20/2025 11:52 AM INDEX NO. 151902/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/20/2025
BACKGROUND
Petitioner THE LEX CONDOMINIUM is a condominium association
located at 135 East 54th Street, New York, New York (premises)
(see New York State Court Electronic Filing System [NYSCEF] Doc.
No. 001, Petition). On May 24, 2023, respondent ELTECH
INDUSTRIES, INC. (Eltech) filed a mechanic's lien with the New
York County Clerk's Office against petitioner and the premises
in the amount of $32,808.00 (see NYSCEF Doc. No. 002, Notice
Under Mechanic's Lien law, dated May 24, 2023). The lien
indicates that it is based on elevator modernization and
maintenance services Eltech performed at the premises from May
05, 2021, through December 21, 2022, wherein a balance of
$32,808.00 remained (see id.).
Now, petitioner moves, by petition and order to show cause
(mot. seq. no. 001), to "terminate, vacate, cancel and
discharge" the mechanic's lien filed by Eltech on May 24, 2023,
on the basis that Eltech failed to timely commence an action to
foreclose the lien or obtain an order extending the time to
foreclose the same (see NYSCEF Doc. No. 004, Memorandum of Law
in Support). Petitioner also requests attorneys' fees and costs
in bringing the instant action (id.).
151902/2025 THE LEX 54 CONDOMINIUM, BY ITS BOARD OF MANAGERS vs. ELTECH Page 2 of 5
INDUSTRIES, INC. ET AL
Motion No. 001
[* 2] 2 of 5
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/20/2025 11:52 AM INDEX NO. 151902/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/20/2025
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to Lien Law§ 17, 2 a mechanic's lien expires by
operation of law one year after filing unless it is extended by
court order or an action to foreclose the lien is commenced
within that time, and a notice of pendency is filed in
connection therewith (see Lien Law§ 17; see also MCK Building
Assoc., Inc. v St. Lawrence Univ., 5 AD3d 911, 912 [3d Dept
2004] [holding that "mechanic's lien expired as a matter of law,
and plaintiff can no longer maintain a cause of action for
foreclosure"]; Z&Z NYC Corp. v UCON Corp., 2010 WL 11489093 [Sup
Ct NY Cnty 2010] [finding that "a notice of lien expires by
operation of law [] where the lienor neither seeks to extend the
lien nor commences a foreclosure action"], citing Malafsky v
Becker, 255 AD 444 [1st Dept 1938]).
Here, more than one year has elapsed since the lien's
filing, and the lien was not extended by court order or
foreclosed upon. Therefore, the mechanic's lien filed by Eltech
on May 24, 2023, automatically expired on May 24, 2024 (see
2 Section 17 of the Lien Law provides, as pertinent here "No lien specified in this
article shall be a lien for a longer period than one year after the notice of lien has
been filed, unless within that time an action is commenced to foreclose the lien, and
a notice of the pendency of such action, whether in a court of record or in a court
not of record, is filed with the county clerk of the county in which the notice of
lien is filed, containing the names of the parties to the action, the object of the
action, a brief description of the real property affected thereby, and the time of
filing the notice of lien; or unless an extension to such lien, except for a lien on
real property improved or to be improved with a single family dwelling, is filed with
the county clerk of the county in which the notice of lien is filed within one year
from the filing of the original notice of lien, continuing such lien and such lien
shall be redocketed as of the date of filing such extension" (emphasis added).
151902/2025 THE LEX 54 CONDOMINIUM, BY ITS BOARD OF MANAGERS vs. ELTECH Page 3 of 5
INDUSTRIES, INC. ET AL
Motion No. 001
[* 3] 3 of 5
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/20/2025 11:52 AM INDEX NO. 151902/2025
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 11 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/20/2025
Pizzarotti, LLC v New York Concrete Washout Sys., Inc. , 210 AD3d
445, 446 [1st Dept 2022]). Because the lien expired by
operation of law on May 24 2024, the court need not terminate,
cancel, vacate or discharge it (see Gallo Brothers Constr. Inc,
v Peccolo, 281 AD2d 811, 813 [3d Dept 2001] [for the proposition
that "the lien itself expires by operation of law"];
Christopulos v Christopulos, 207 AD3d 698, 698-99 [2d Dept
2022][for the same]).
With respect to petitioner's application for attorneys'
fees and costs in bringing the instant action, petitioner
provides no case law or other authority to support this request
(see U.S. Underwriters Ins. Co. v City Club Hotel, LLC, 3 NY3d
592, 597 [2004] [holding that "a prevailing party may not recover
attorneys' fees from the losing party except where authorized by
statute, agreement, or court rule"]).
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that petitioner's motion, by order to show cause
(mot. seq. no. 001), is denied; it is further
ORDERED that the petition is dismissed; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall mark the file
accordingly.
8/19/2025
DATE
CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED □ NON-FINAL DISPOSITION
GRANTED DENIED □ GRANTED IN PART □ OTHER
151902/2025 THE LEX 54 CONDOMINIUM, BY ITS BOARD OF MANAGERS vs. ELTECH Page 4 of 5
INDUSTRIES, INC. ET AL
Motion No. 001
[* 4] 4 of 5