EVIDENCE - NOT TAKING JUDICIAL NOTICE

 

WYTHE BERRY FEE OWNER LLC v. WYTHE BERRY LLC, 2021 NY Slip Op 51140 - NY: Supreme Court 2021:

"The first issue is whether this Court may take judicial notice of loan documents recorded on ACRIS. "To be sure, a court may take judicial notice of facts which are capable of immediate and accurate determination by resort to easily accessible sources of indisputable accuracy" (Hamilton v Miller, 23 NY3d 592, 603 [2014], quoting People v Jones, 73 NY2d 427, 431 [1989] [internal quotation marks omitted]). The Court has discretion to take judicial notice of public documents that are generated in a manner which assures their reliability such as material derived from official government websites (see Kingsbrook Jewish Med. Ctr. v Allstate Ins. Co., 61 AD3d 13, 19 [2d Dept 2009]). The law ". . . recognizes generally two disjunctive circumstances where information may be judicially noticed. The first is when information "rests upon knowledge . . . [that is] widely accepted" (Ptasznik v Schultz, 247 AD2d 197, 198 [2d Dept 1998] [emphasis added]) such as calendar dates, geographical locations, and sunrise times (id. at 199). The second "rests upon . . . sources [that are] widely accepted and unimpeachable" (id. at 198 [emphasis added]), such as reliable uncontested governmental records" (Kingsbook, 61 AD3d at 19). Here, although the Security Instrument was recorded against the property and available on ACRIS, it is not the kind of information that rests upon knowledge that is widely accepted or sources widely accepted and unimpeachable. Therefore, the Court declines to take judicial notice of the loan documents filed on ACRIS...."