BOARD HAD FINAL SAY AS TO COMMON AREA DECORATIONS AND FURNISHINGS
After K.N. brought a lawsuit which sought monetary damages and injunctive relief as against her cooperative’s Board of Directors, the latter sought to dismiss K.N.’s claims relating to “house rule 4.” And when the New York County Supreme Court sided with the building, K.N. appealed.
On its review of the record, the Appellate Division, First Department, thought that the house rule in question unequivocally provided that if shareholders disagreed as to the common hallways’ decorations and furnishings, the board of directors would ultimately decide.
Given the “plain reading” of that rule, the AD1 thought the court below had “properly dismissed” that part of K.N.’s complaint which sought to “enjoin defendant from, among other things, making changes to the existing decorative scheme in the common hallway.”
Would you have ruled any differently?
# # #
DECISION