Justice Donna Mills
Defendants moved to cancel a notice of pendency filed against the subject premises and quash a subpoena served on non-party Aleida Casanas. Plaintiffs Peter and Elizabeth Casanas cross-moved to compel defendants to respond to the first request production of documents. They alleged they held a 100-year lease for two apartments in the premises, seeking a declaratory judgment they were lessees in the premises. Richard Casanas asserted plaintiffs occupied the units as licensees of the prior owner, causing Carlei Group to announce the license was revoked. Plaintiffs alleged to have executed the lease with the prior owner, Richard and Peter’s parents, Carlos and Aleida. Defendants argued plaintiffs’ lease was a forgery. The court found the demands, except 21 and 22, were material and necessary in the prosecution of this action, and should be responded to by defendants, and denied cancellation of the notice of pendency. Also, the testimony plaintiffs sought to obtain from non-parties was relevant as it may discuss the non-parties’ observations of the purported execution of the lease. Thus, as the testimony could only be provided by those that attended the signing, defendants’ motion to quash subpoenas was denied.
