ع
The New York Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously upheld a lower court’s order dismissing Saad Ahmed’s complaint against his mother, Shahla Choudhry, and his sister, Nazia Ahmed. The decision in Ahmed v Choudhry, designated as 2026 NY Slip Op 06518, determined that key claims including breach of contract, unjust enrichment and quantum meruit fell outside the applicable six-year statute of limitations. Supreme Court Justice Lyle E. Frank had granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the entire complaint on May 21, 2025, a ruling the appellate panel affirmed without costs.
The case originated from a family dispute over assets left by Mahmood Choudhry, who died in Saudi Arabia in December 2009. Ahmed alleged that his mother and sister made repeated promises regarding the transfer of property titles but failed to follow through on those commitments. The New York State Law Reporting Bureau published the appellate decision, which traced the conflict to real estate holdings in Pennsylvania and on Long Island as well as the handling of the father’s estate.
Central to the allegations was a property in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, that Ahmed said his mother and sister assured him would eventually be placed in his name. He claimed he relied on those assurances for years while continuing to support family financial arrangements. By December 2016, however, no transfer had occurred, according to the complaint details outlined in the court filing.
A separate dispute involved a home on Long Island that Ahmed said he purchased in 2016 after the family told him they had no money and that his mother needed a place to live. The defendants later moved into the property and asserted ownership through an entity known as 521 Saxton Court LLC, the complaint charged. Ahmed accused them of using proceeds from the Pennsylvania property sale and misappropriating funds that should have gone toward his interests.
The appellate court noted that Ahmed failed to demonstrate his reliance on the defendants’ representations for more than eight years was reasonable in light of their repeated failure to fulfill the alleged agreement. The panel found that the plaintiff had not adequately opposed dismissal of several causes of action in the lower court proceedings. Attorneys for Ahmed, from Thompson & Skrabanek, and for the defendants, from Kapoor & Coyle Law Firm, presented arguments before the court reached its determination.
The ruling brings to a close the appeal filed under Index No. 650797/24 after Ahmed challenged the initial dismissal. Court records show the original complaint was filed in February 2024 in New York County Supreme Court. The decision applies standard New York limitations periods to the family claims involving both domestic real estate and the international estate element stemming from the father’s death abroad.
