Kucker & Bruh, LLP: John M. Churneftsky

John M. Churneftsky

Mr. Churneftsky is a partner in the K&B firm, and a senior attorney with extensive experience litigating in the New York Supreme Court and Civil Court regarding commercial and residential real estate. He has prosecuted matters involving non-primary residence, sublet and assignment, succession, illusory tenancy and Yellowstone injunctions. He has substantial knowledge and training in other areas, including defamation, libel, Surrogate's Court proceedings, and litigations concerning the enforcement of by-laws and restrictive covenants in homeowners' and property owners' associations. He has prosecuted multi-million dollar claims against the State of New York and the Village of Mamaroneck based on damages to the ecology in tidal wetlands areas. His practice areas also include complex estate planning, trust and estate administration, elder law planning, business valuations and complex corporate and real estate tax matters.

Mr. Churneftsky is admitted to practice before all of the trial courts and appellate courts in the state of New York. He also is admitted to the bar of the following federal courts: Supreme Court of the United States, and the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York.

He is a contributor to real estate law publications such as Landlord v. Tenant and Apartment Law Insider. He is a member of the National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA).

Reported cases in which Mr. Churneftsky has appeared include: Sted Tenants Owners Corp v. Chumpitaz, et al., 5 A.D.3d 663, 774 N.Y.S.2d 718 (2nd Dep't 2004) [unanimous reversal of trial court's decision granting summary judgment, because papers in support of the motion failed to include copies of the pleadings]; 9394 LLC, at al. v. Farris, 304 A.D.2d 804, 757 N.Y.S.2d 802 (2nd Dep't 2003) [unanimous reversal of trial court's dismissal of civil complaint seeking injunctive relief and damages based on defendants' unlawful use of residential premises for business uses, in violation of restrictive covenants in an agreement among property owners; in so ruling, Appellate Division (i) protected the plaintiffs' critical rights to obtain the notice required by CPLR 3211(c) before any motion to dismiss may be converted to a summary judgment motion, and (ii) determined that plaintiffs' civil complaint was properly framed and should not have been dismissed even if the trial court had provided the requisite CPLR 3211(c) notice]; 270 Riverside Drive, Inc. v. Wilson, 755 N.Y.S2d 215 (Civ. Ct. N.Y. Co., 2003) (Bedford, J.) [illusory tenancy]. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Significant unreported decisions include: Rolling Realty LLC v. Dubinsky, Civ. Ct. N.Y. Co., Index No. L&T 98864/05 (Schneider,J.) (Mar.10, 2006) [K&B prevailed at trial and defeated tenant-respondent's warranty of habitability claim/defense which alleged the landlord had placed noisy tenants in an adjacent apartment and encouraged them to make intolerable noise in an effort to drive the respondent from his apartment]; 9394 LLC, et al. v. Kehler, et al., Index No. 09307/2002 (Sup. Ct., Westchester Co., May 2, 2003) (Nastasi, J.) [court upheld the broad rights of plaintiffs to obtain pretrial disclosure and categorically rejected defendants' arguments that a so-called "consultant" is immune from being deposed]; Lexington Partners LLC v. Pelter, Civ. Ct. N.Y. Co., Index No. L&T 050356/02 (Bedford, J.) [court upheld right of a landlord to evict a tenant, 85 years of age, who had endangered the life of other tenants and employees of the building by aberrant behavior, including the threatening use of a bow and arrow, and a steel sword].

Legal Disclaimer

Attorney Advertising

Kucker & Bruh, LLP – 747 Third Avenue – New York, NY 10017 – (212) 869-5030 – (212) 944-5818 Fax