A New York appellate court has ruled in a property dispute involving two brothers, impacting the future of a corporation they established together. The court's decision allows Nathan Sakeni to seek a preliminary injunction against the sale of property owned by their corporation, Rockville Corp. This ruling affects the estate of Nathan's deceased brother, which is now managed by his widow, Kathrin Sakni.
The case, Sakeni v. Sakni, was decided on August 19, 2026, by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. The court's ruling is significant as it addresses the rights of a surviving partner in a business arrangement following the death of a co-owner.
Background
The dispute began when Nathan Sakeni and his brother, referred to as the decedent, created Rockville Corp. in 1996. The corporation was formed to purchase real estate for Nathan to operate a business. Nathan claims he held an 80% interest in Rockville, while his brother held a 20% interest. After the decedent's death, his share in the corporation became part of his estate, which Kathrin Sakni, the decedent's wife, was appointed to manage.
After failing to negotiate a purchase of his brother's 20% interest in Rockville, Nathan alleges that Kathrin and other co-trustees began to market the property without his consent. This prompted Nathan to file a lawsuit seeking injunctive and declaratory relief, claiming his ownership stake in the corporation and requesting that the defendants be prohibited from selling the property.
The Ruling
The court ruled in favor of Nathan Sakeni, granting his motion for a preliminary injunction. The court found that Nathan had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of his case, a potential for irreparable injury if the injunction were not granted, and that the balance of equities favored him. The ruling stated, "The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction."
The judges on the panel included Valerie Brathwaite Nelson, Lillian Wan, Laurence L. Love, and Elena Goldberg Velazquez. They affirmed the lower court's decision, which had denied the defendants' motion to dismiss Nathan's complaint.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for Nathan Sakeni and the estate of his deceased brother. It reinforces the rights of a surviving partner in a business arrangement, particularly when disputes arise over ownership interests after a partner's death. The decision allows Nathan to maintain control over the property in question while the legal proceedings continue.
The court's ruling also highlights the importance of clear agreements between business partners. In this case, the lack of a written agreement regarding the transfer of ownership interests after death has resulted in a complex legal battle. As a result, the outcome of this case could influence how similar disputes are handled in the future, potentially encouraging clearer documentation of ownership arrangements in business partnerships.
What's Next
The defendants may choose to appeal the ruling to a higher court, but details on any potential appeal were not available in the court filing. Additionally, there may be related cases pending regarding the estate and the management of Rockville Corp.