Justice Doris Ling-Cohan
Defendants, including 360 Riverside Owners Corp., moved to dismiss the complaint. Plaintiff tenants cross-moved for summary judgment in their favor. The complaint alleged causes of action concerning a “flip-tax” imposed by the cooperative board on the sale of plaintiffs’ shares. Plaintiffs alleged the tax was not authorized by the co-op’s by-laws and violated the Business Corporation Law. They argued they were unaware of the tax until they sold their shares, contending the imposition of same was never validly authorized. Defendants argued the tax was in place for years before plaintiffs’ acquired their shares. They alleged Norton and Printz were aware of the tax, claiming it was “inconceivable” they were unaware as they both served as treasurer for the board. Defendants noted board minutes indicated both Norton and Printz referencing and reporting on the tax. The court denied dismissal of the claims asserted against 360 Riverside finding the documents defendants presented did not conclusively establish that the tax was validly adopted. It noted the documents indicated the co-op imposed a flip tax, but the underlying authorization was missing. Also, as issue was not yet joined, plaintiffs’ cross-motion was premature.
