An Honest Lien-Amount Dispute Is Different from Willful Exaggeration

Reviewed September 7, 2026.

In Ferran Enterprises, Inc. v. Cauldwell-Wingate Company, Inc., 31 Misc 3d 1209(A) (Sup Ct, NY County 2011), conflicting payment analyses and the parties’ change-order practices raised factual questions about the balance and the lienor’s intent. The court declined to decide the principal lien’s willful-exaggeration issue on summary judgment.

The ruling did not validate every lien

The court separately discharged two additional liens as untimely. Failure to prove intentional exaggeration did not cure their filing defects. The contract and other payment issues also remained for further proceedings.

Lien Law § 39 distinguishes willful exaggeration from a mere inaccuracy or honest difference of opinion. But a claimant’s description of an error as innocent is not conclusive. Contracts, invoices, credits, contemporaneous calculations and testimony determine whether the amount was knowingly inflated.

Reconcile extra-work tickets with later change orders so that the same work is not billed twice. Keep an explanation for disputed items and address errors promptly. Review filing deadlines, service and lienable work separately; a good-faith amount dispute does not excuse those requirements or guarantee recovery.

Kushnick Pallaci PLLC assists clients throughout New York with lien foreclosure and defense. Contact 631-752-7100 or vtp@kushnicklaw.com.

Attorney Advertising. General information, not legal advice.