Dan Brecher
Counsel
212-286-0747 dbrecher@sh-law.comFirm Insights
NY Court: No Statute of Limitations for a Forged Deed
Author: Dan Brecher
Date: August 17, 2015
Key Contacts
Back
New York’s Highest Court Recently Held that the Six-Year Statute of Limitations Governing Fraud Claims does not Apply to a Forged Deed
New York’s highest court recently held that the six-year statute of limitations governing fraud claims does not apply to forged deeds. The New York Court of Appeals’ decision in Faison v. Lewis held there is no time limit for such allegations.
The Facts of the Case
Plaintiff Dorothy M. Faison (Faison) is the daughter and administrator of the estate for her father, Percy Lee Gogins, Jr. (Gogins). When their mother died, Gogins and his sister, defendant Dorothy Lewis (Lewis), inherited a three-family house in Brooklyn. Several years later, Lewis conveyed her half-interest in the property to her daughter Tonya Lewis (Tonya). In February 2001, Tonya recorded a deed claiming to correct the prior deed from Lewis. This corrected deed, dated December 14, 2000, purported to also convey Gogins’s half-interest in the real property to Tonya. Gogins passed away in March 2001.
In September 2002, Faison filed an action on behalf of Gogins’s estate against Lewis and Tonya, claiming the corrected deed was, in fact, a forged deed since her father’s signature was a forgery. However, the Brooklyn Supreme Court dismissed the complaint, finding that Faison lacked capacity to sue because she was not the estate’s administrator.
Several years later, Tonya obtained a $269,332.00 mortgage from defendant Bank of America (BOA). Shortly thereafter, Faison was named administrator of her father’s estate and filed suit against Tonya, Lewis and BOA. The suit alleged that the deed and mortgage were null and void based on the alleged forgery that took place in 2000. The Brooklyn Supreme Court also dismissed the second complaint, holding that the six-year statute of limitations governing fraud claims had expired. The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the dismissal with respect to the forgery claim against BOA.
The Court’s Decision
The appeals court reversed, holding that a claim against a forged deed is not subject to a statute of limitations defense. Citing prior New York case law, the court noted that a forged deed is void at its inception, thereby making any encumbrance upon real property based on a forged deed also null and void.
“[A] forged deed is void, not merely voidable. That legal status cannot be changed, regardless of how long it may take for the forgery to be uncovered,” the Court explained.
The panel further reasoned that it would “not impose statutes of limitations on forged deeds because the resulting prejudice to the ‘rights of the true owner of real estate’ only ‘open[s] the door for the destruction of all titles, and make[s] it much easier for the criminal to purloin real than personal property.’”
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
NY Court: No Statute of Limitations for a Forged Deed
Author: Dan Brecher
New York’s Highest Court Recently Held that the Six-Year Statute of Limitations Governing Fraud Claims does not Apply to a Forged Deed
New York’s highest court recently held that the six-year statute of limitations governing fraud claims does not apply to forged deeds. The New York Court of Appeals’ decision in Faison v. Lewis held there is no time limit for such allegations.
The Facts of the Case
Plaintiff Dorothy M. Faison (Faison) is the daughter and administrator of the estate for her father, Percy Lee Gogins, Jr. (Gogins). When their mother died, Gogins and his sister, defendant Dorothy Lewis (Lewis), inherited a three-family house in Brooklyn. Several years later, Lewis conveyed her half-interest in the property to her daughter Tonya Lewis (Tonya). In February 2001, Tonya recorded a deed claiming to correct the prior deed from Lewis. This corrected deed, dated December 14, 2000, purported to also convey Gogins’s half-interest in the real property to Tonya. Gogins passed away in March 2001.
In September 2002, Faison filed an action on behalf of Gogins’s estate against Lewis and Tonya, claiming the corrected deed was, in fact, a forged deed since her father’s signature was a forgery. However, the Brooklyn Supreme Court dismissed the complaint, finding that Faison lacked capacity to sue because she was not the estate’s administrator.
Several years later, Tonya obtained a $269,332.00 mortgage from defendant Bank of America (BOA). Shortly thereafter, Faison was named administrator of her father’s estate and filed suit against Tonya, Lewis and BOA. The suit alleged that the deed and mortgage were null and void based on the alleged forgery that took place in 2000. The Brooklyn Supreme Court also dismissed the second complaint, holding that the six-year statute of limitations governing fraud claims had expired. The Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the dismissal with respect to the forgery claim against BOA.
The Court’s Decision
The appeals court reversed, holding that a claim against a forged deed is not subject to a statute of limitations defense. Citing prior New York case law, the court noted that a forged deed is void at its inception, thereby making any encumbrance upon real property based on a forged deed also null and void.
“[A] forged deed is void, not merely voidable. That legal status cannot be changed, regardless of how long it may take for the forgery to be uncovered,” the Court explained.
The panel further reasoned that it would “not impose statutes of limitations on forged deeds because the resulting prejudice to the ‘rights of the true owner of real estate’ only ‘open[s] the door for the destruction of all titles, and make[s] it much easier for the criminal to purloin real than personal property.’”