Lien Amendments and Substantial Compliance: Rigano v. Vibar

Historical case note: September 30, 2015

In Matter of Rigano v. Vibar Construction, Inc., the Appellate Division, Second Department, addressed a lien amendment after remittitur from the Court of Appeals. The court permitted the amendment and rejected summary discharge because the notice substantially complied with the Lien Law and the amendment would not prejudice another party.

The decision illustrates why a naming error does not always end a lien claim. It does not mean that every defective or expired lien can be repaired.

Practical guidance added September 7, 2026

Lien Law § 12-a distinguishes amendments that may be filed from amendments requiring a court order. The timing, type of error, effect on other parties and proposed change all matter. Obtain advice before assuming an amendment can increase the lien or cure an expired filing period.

Kushnick Pallaci PLLC reviews New York mechanic's lien issues and handles foreclosure and lien-defense disputes. Preserve the original notice, service records and property records for review.

This historical summary is not a complete review of later case law or advice about a particular lien.