| Conwell Props., Inc. v DAG Rte. Six, LLC |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 06785 [210 AD3d 1051] |
| November 30, 2022 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| Conwell Properties, Inc., Appellant, v DAG Route Six, LLC, Respondent. |
Reisman Rubeo & Altman, LLP, Hawthorne, NY (Mark I. Reisman, Mark A. Rubeo, Jr., and Danielle M. White of counsel), for appellant.
Piscionere & Nemarow, P.C., Rye, NY (Anthony G. Piscionere and Michael J. Konicoff of counsel), for respondent.
In an action, inter alia, for declaratory and injunctive relief and to recover damages for breach of an easement agreement, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Thomas P. Zugibe, J.), dated July 16, 2019. The order denied the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendant's demand for a jury trial.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendant's demand for a jury trial is granted.
Where, as here, a defendant interposes counterclaims of an equitable nature related to a cause of action asserted in the complaint, the defendant waives a jury trial on all causes of action, whether legal or equitable in nature (see Haber v Cohen, 74 AD3d 1282, 1282 [2010]; Adelstein v City of New York, 212 AD2d 748, 749 [1995]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the plaintiff's motion to strike the defendant's demand for a jury trial. Connolly, J.P., Christopher, Wooten and Wan, JJ., concur.