| LGP Founds., Inc. v Bantry |
| 2009 NY Slip Op 01782 [60 AD3d 739] |
| March 10, 2009 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| LGP Foundations, Inc., Respondent, v Bryan Bantry,Appellant. |
—[*1] Jeffrey B. Hulse, Sound Beach, N.Y., for respondent.
In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals, aslimited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, Jr.,J.), dated September 23, 2008, as denied that branch of his motion which was for summaryjudgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
"[L]icensing statutes are to be strictly construed, and . . . an unlicensedcontractor forfeits the right to recover damages based either on breach of contract or on quantummeruit, as well as the right to foreclose on a mechanic's lien" (Callos, Inc. v Julianelli,300 AD2d 612, 613 [2002]).
The defendant made a prima facie showing of his entitlement to judgment as a matter of lawdismissing the complaint by demonstrating that the plaintiff, a home improvement contractor,was not licensed as such by the Town of East Hampton at the time the subject contract wassigned or when the relevant work was performed (id. at 613). However, in response, theplaintiff raised a triable issue of fact as to whether the subject property is "residential property"within the scope of the applicable provisions of the Code of the Town of Easthampton and,therefore, whether the licensure provision of the Town Code applies to this case (seeCode of Town of Easthampton §§ 156-2, 156-5, 156-10).[*2]
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied thatbranch of the defendant's motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.Rivera, J.P., Spolzino, Ritter and Miller, JJ., concur.