A New York appellate court has ruled in favor of DSSR Realty Corp. and Ortov Lighting, Inc. in a property damage case against President Sai II, LLC and Triborough Construction Services, Inc. The decision, made on November 4, 2026, allows the plaintiffs to pursue damages for injuries to their property caused by excavation work conducted by the defendants. This ruling is significant for property owners who may face similar issues regarding liability for property damage resulting from construction activities.

The case, DSSR Realty Corp v. President Sai II, LLC, was filed under docket number 2023-00963 in the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The plaintiffs, DSSR Realty Corp. and Ortov Lighting, Inc., claimed that their property located on Union Street suffered damage due to negligent excavation by Triborough Construction Services at an adjacent property owned by President Sai II, LLC. The dispute arose when the plaintiffs filed their complaint in May 2020, alleging violations of the New York City Building Code and the Administrative Code of the City of New York.

In the initial proceedings, the plaintiffs sought summary judgment, or a ruling in their favor without a trial, on the issue of liability against both President and Triborough. In response, President Sai II cross-moved for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint, arguing that it was time-barred, meaning it was filed after the legal deadline for such claims. The Supreme Court, however, denied both motions in an order dated January 17, 2023, prompting the appeal from the plaintiffs and the cross-appeal from President Sai II.

In its ruling, the appellate court reversed the Supreme Court's decision regarding the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. The court stated, "The Supreme Court should have granted those branches of the plaintiffs' motion which were for summary judgment on the issue of liability against President and Triborough." The judges involved in the decision included Cheryl E. Chambers, Linda Christopher, Helen Voutsinas, and Phillip Hom.

The court found that the plaintiffs had provided sufficient evidence to establish that the excavation work conducted by Triborough, under the authority of President Sai II, directly caused damage to their property. The court referenced the New York City Building Code, which imposes strict liability on those who cause excavations that damage adjacent properties. The court noted that the plaintiffs demonstrated that the Union Street property continued to sustain damages within the statutory period, which supports their claim for recovery.

Additionally, the court ruled that President Sai II's argument that the complaint was time-barred was without merit. The judges concluded that the evidence presented by the plaintiffs was adequate to show that the damage was apparent and ongoing, thus allowing them to pursue their claims against the defendants.

This ruling is important for property owners in New York, as it clarifies the responsibilities of construction companies and property owners in maintaining safety and preventing damage to adjacent properties during excavation activities. The court's decision emphasizes the legal obligations outlined in the New York City Building Code, which aims to protect property owners from the adverse effects of nearby construction.

The outcome of this case may set a precedent for future property damage claims related to construction activities. It reinforces the principle that property owners can seek redress for damages caused by excavation work, provided they can demonstrate a direct link between the construction activities and the damage incurred.

Looking ahead, it remains to be seen whether President Sai II will seek further legal recourse, such as an appeal to a higher court. The court filing did not specify any related cases pending at this time. However, the ruling could influence similar cases involving property damage claims in New York, as it clarifies the standards for liability in such situations.