Salas v. 711-715 E. 231st St., LLC , Appellate Division, First Department, Decided August 20, 2026, 2026 NY Slip Op 05064 shows both sides of a decision dismissing a Judiciary Law 487 claim. With a two-judge dissent, it may well go to the Court of Appeals.
Holding: “Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Andrew J. Cohen, J.), entered September 11, 2025, which denied the motions of third-party defendants Roytblat Law Group, PLLC and Alexander Roytblat (collectively, Roytblat) and Jennifer Lebron to dismiss the third-party complaint as against them, reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motions granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Defendants/third-party plaintiffs failed to demonstrate “a showing of egregious conduct or a chronic and extreme pattern of behavior on the part of” Roytblat, or demonstrate that deliberate misrepresentations necessary to sustain a Judiciary Law § 487 claim were made to defendants and the court (Facebook, Inc. v DLA Piper LLP [US], 134 AD3d 610, 615, 23 N.Y.S.3d 173 [1st Dept 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 903, 40 N.Y.S.3d 351, 63 N.E.3d 71 [2016]). The third-party complaint failed to plead in a nonconclusory manner that Roytblat continued to advance the underlying trip-and-fall claim after receiving information indicating that the [*2] claim was fraudulent (cf. Schnur v Balestriere, 208 AD3d 1117, 1118, 175 N.Y.S.3d 50 [1st Dept 2022]).”
Dissent: “The third-party complaint adequately meets the heightened pleading standard for a claim under Judiciary Law § 487. It alleges [*4] that video evidence appears to show Wilson Pena, a third-party defendant who concededly performs investigative services for Roytblat, deliberately creating the sidewalk defect at issue in the underlying personal injury action. Plaintiff also appears in the video to feign a trip-and-fall accident caused by the defect. The video evidence, links to which were included in the third party complaint, supports this allegation. The complaint further alleges that defendants’ attorney informed Roytblat in February 2024 that the underlying personal injury claim that Roytblat was pursuing was fraudulent, and that video evidence existed showing fabrication of the sidewalk defect and staging of the accident. Despite having knowledge of the fraud, Roytblat continued to pursue the litigation over the following months and sought to discontinue the action only when informed that a news report concerning the fraud was about to air. Defendants set forth detailed allegations regarding the timing and sequence of communications and filings, identifying with specificity the litigation documents Roytblat purportedly continued to submit after the alleged notice date. The majority fails to demonstrate why such [*5] allegations are conclusory and insufficient to establish a § 487 claim.
[**3] Although documentary proof of the notification that Roytblat allegedly received from defendants is not in the record, a § 487 claim does not require documentary proof of scienter in order to survive dismissal; rather, where the pleading sufficiently alleges intent to deceive the court or a party, dismissal is proper where documentary evidence conclusively refutes allegations of intent (see Schnur v Balestriere, 208 AD3d 1117, 1118, 175 N.Y.S.3d 50 [1st Dept 2022]). Here, there is no documentary evidence negating the allegation that defendants sent and Roytblat received the February 2024 communication. Nor does the record contradict the claim that Roytblat continued filing documents after receiving that notice. Thus, unlike in Facebook, where documents disproved the alleged timing of the attorneys’ knowledge, there is no conclusive refutation in this record (134 AD3d at 615).
Taken as true, these allegations constitute egregious and intentional conduct on the part of Roytblat (see Schnur, 208 AD3d at 1118). Accordingly, I would hold that defendants/third-party plaintiffs have adequately pleaded a § 487 claim, and dismissal at this juncture is not warranted.”