The Appellate Division has upheld a ruling by Justice Debra Silber in a case brought by two Brooklyn homeowners who accused Verizon of installing new equipment in their backyard without proper permission. The panel agreed with Justice Silber that the lawsuit should be dismissed.

The case, Cisco v. Verizon New York, centered on a utility pole that has stood in the yard since 1936. Verizon replaced that pole in 2015 after damage from Hurricane Sandy. Before the work was done, one of the homeowners signed documents allowing Verizon to enter the yard, replace the pole and place fiber-optic equipment on it so the company could provide phone and internet service.

Cases like this often turn on written permissions that utilities obtain before entering private property. Courts generally look at whether a homeowner gave clear consent for the work and whether the utility stayed within the scope of that permission rather than on later disputes about how the work was understood or whether technology has changed since the original agreement. The long presence of a utility pole can also reflect an established right to use the property for public services, even as equipment on the pole is updated over time.

Against that backdrop, the homeowners sued Verizon and its parent company four years later, claiming the company overstepped by installing FiOS equipment and arguing they were entitled to compensation because they believed they had agreed only to a repair. They also accused Verizon of trespassing, deceptive business practices and fraud.

Justice Silber dismissed the case, and the homeowners appealed. The Appellate Division agreed with the judge’s decision. 

The court explained that the homeowners had signed written permission for the work, which meant Verizon was not a trespasser. It also ruled that several of the claims were filed too late and that the fraud accusations had not been stated with enough detail. The court added that the parent company, Verizon Communications Inc., was not a proper defendant because it had no role in the installation.

The judges also said the homeowners could not amend their complaint because the changes they proposed would not fix the problems with their claims.

With the ruling, Justice Silber’s decision stands, and the case against Verizon is closed.