Leonard Livote
How Judge Livote decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On summary judgment in premises-liability and traffic-accident cases, he credits an unrebutted right-of-way or open-and-obvious defense but is willing to be reversed where the appellate court finds the risk was actually the sole proximate cause of the accident either way -- his rulings on both sides of that line were affirmed and reversed roughly evenly in this sample.
“the plaintiff's failure to yield the right-of-way was the sole proximate cause of the accident”
In shareholder-derivative and corporate-dispute cases, he applies the statute of limitations strictly from the date of the FIRST alleged repudiation of a fiduciary duty, rejecting attempts to peg the limitations clock to a later triggering event like a business's eventual dissolution.
“Garcia's alleged opening of a restaurant in 2004 constituted the repudiation of his fiduciary duty by which plaintiff was damaged, such that his future actions merely constituted consequences of that initial act”
On preliminary-injunction motions involving restrictive covenants, he is willing to grant narrower carve-outs (enjoining threats/intimidation toward third-party customers) while denying the broader relief that would effectively grant the ultimate merits relief sought, rather than an all-or-nothing ruling.
“Simon demonstrates a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim that the restrictive covenants over his employment contained in the agreements are at least partially unenforceable”
In Article 78 review of administrative agency action taken without a hearing, he scrutinizes whether the agency provided a genuine rational basis for departing from a hearing officer's recommendation, rather than deferring reflexively to the agency.
“the Sheriff's Office failed to provide a rational basis for its decision to reject the OATH recommendation as to the Sealing Order”
Procedural preferences
Commercial Division Part A requires the words 'COMMERCIAL DIVISION' conspicuously marked on Commercial Division motion papers, and all such motions must be made returnable directly in his Part on his own Tuesday motion day, rather than through the Centralized Motion Part.
“all Commercial Division motions made before Justices Marguerite A. Grays or Leonard Livote must be made returnable directly before either judge in their respective Commercial Division Parts and on their respective motion days”
Part 33 motions are decided on submission with no oral argument unless the court grants a specific request for it.
“All motions are currently on submission. There is no oral argument unless requested by the Court.”
Cautions
On a motion to hold a party in contempt for violating a discovery order, the conditional-contempt language itself will be vacated on appeal if it lacks the Judiciary Law sec. 756 statutory ten-day-notice warning, even where the underlying discovery directive is otherwise upheld -- practitioners moving for contempt-backed compliance orders should include the statutory warning language.
“the defendants were never provided with the warning required by Judiciary Law sec. 756”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered April 20, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action alleging that the plaintiff is the owner of the subject property by adverse possession.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered March 26, 2018. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the first and second counterclaims.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered July 31, 2018. The order denied the motion of the defendants Sleepy's, LLC, and Mattress Firm, Inc., pursuant to CPLR 7503 to compel arbitration of the plaintiffs' claims and stay all proceedings in the action pending arbitration.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered January 23, 2020. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the defendants' motion which was pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint.”
“The order entered May 15, 2020, granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the first though sixth causes of action in the complaint. ... the judgment is affirmed”
“The order denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and on their counterclaims for adverse possession, granted the plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the complaint, and canceled the notice of pendency against the subject real property.”
“granted the plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability on the complaint, and canceled the notice of pendency against the subject real property.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), dated June 28, 2019. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted those branches of the motion of the defendants ... which were for summary judgment dismissing the first and fourth causes of action insofar as asserted against the defendant Vincent Tomasino, Jr., and the third cause of action insofar as asserted against the defendants Vincent Tomasino, Jr., and Jackson Bounty, LLC.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered October 8, 2019. The order denied the defendants' motion for a preliminary injunction. ... the defendants failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits and thus, their motion for a preliminary injunction was properly denied”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered September 10, 2019. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was pursuant to CPLR 5015 (a) to vacate an order of the same court dated August 29, 2018, granting the unopposed motion of those defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered March 14, 2023. The order granted the motion of the defendants Yong Won Bu ... and Su Nam Bu pursuant to RPAPL 1301 to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), dated January 8, 2024. The order denied that defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against it.”
“an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leonard Livote, J.), entered December 14, 2023. The order, insofar as appealed from, granted those branches of the plaintiff's motion which were for summary judgment on the issue of liability and dismissing the seventh affirmative defense, asserting equitable estoppel.”
Put Judge Livote's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Livote actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Livote's own signed orders and cites them.