FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/17/ :44 PM INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/17/2016

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/17/ :44 PM INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/17/2016"

Transcription

1 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/17/ :44 PM INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 57 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/17/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS ASH BROKERAGE CORPORATION, Index No /2012 -against- Plaintiff, MOSHE LIEBERMAN; BLACKSTONE GROUP BROKERAGE, LLC; METROPOLIS AGENCY LLC; TZVI KATZ; YAAKOV ILOWITZ; HADASSAH ILOWITZ; and SHAYA ILOWITZ, Defendants. REPLY MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT Of counsel: Ira S. Lipsius Phillip M. Manela LIPSIUS-BENHAIM LAW, LLP Kew Gardens Road, Suite 1030 Kew Gardens, New York Telephone: Fax: Attorneys for Defendants 1 of 16

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. THE COURT SHOULD REJECT ASH S ARGUMENTS BEYOND PAGE 25 OF ITS BRIEF... 1 II. LAW OF THE CASE DOES NOT APPLY.. 2 III. THE RELATION BACK DOCTRINE DOES NOT APPLY 4 A. The Ilowitzs are not United in Interest with the Original Defendants.. 4 B. There was no Mistake.. 5 IV. THERE WAS NO NEWLY DISCOVERED FRAUD 7 V. ASH HAS NOT PLED THE NECESSARY ELEMENTS TO PIERCE THE CORPORATE VEIL 8 VI. CLAIMS AGAINST THE ILOWITZS INDIVIDUALLY ARE BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS 11 VII. ASH ILLEGALLY SHARED THE COMMISSIONS WITH BLACKSTONE AND CANNOT NOW SUE FOR RECOUPMENT. 11 VIII. ASH CONCEDES NO CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST SHAYA ILOWITZ.. 13 IX. ASH S CONCEDES ITS ALLEGATIONS ARE BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF FRAUD 14 CONCLUSION 14 2 of 16

3 Defendants respectfully submit this Memorandum of Law in reply to ASH s Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint ( ASH Opp.) This Court should not consider ASH s arguments contained after page 25 of ASH s 42- page opposition brief, in violation of this Court s rules. Further, ASH does not oppose, and therefore concedes, that it has no cause of action against Shaya Ilowitz, and that all of ASH s causes of action, against all Defendants, are barred by the Statute of Frauds. ASH s remaining arguments (Points II, III, and IV) fail for the reasons set forth below. I. THE COURT SHOULD REJECT ASH S ARGUMENTS BEYOND PAGE 25 OF ITS BRIEF ASH s Memorandum of Law in Opposition consists of 42 pages, in clear violation of the rules of this Court. The Uniform Rules of the Commercial Division, 22 NYCRR (g), Rule 17, limit memoranda of law to 25 pages: Unless otherwise permitted by the court: (i) briefs or memoranda of law shall be limited to 25 pages each; (ii) reply memoranda shall be no more than 15 pages and shall not contain any arguments that do not respond or relate to those made in the memoranda in chief; (iii) affidavits and affirmations shall be limited to 25 pages each. The Kings County Commercial Division Rules Provide: 19. The Kings County Commercial Division will strictly enforce Uniform Rules, (g), Rules 6 and 17 relating to the form and length of papers submitted to the Court. Unless the Court has authorized a longer brief in advance, counsel are advised that briefs and affidavits in excess of 25 and 15 pages as specified in the Rules may be rejected. 1 3 of 16

4 This rule was strictly enforced in a recent case, Aish Hatorah N.Y., Inc. v Fetman, 48 Misc. 3d 1207(A) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2015; emphasis supplied): Respondent submits a 52 page memorandum of law, without leave of the Court, in violation of the rules of the Commercial Division which limit memoranda of law to 25 pages (see 22 NYCRR (g), Rule 17). Accordingly, the Court will only consider the first 25 pages of respondent's memorandum. Here too, this Court should only consider the first 25 pages of ASH s memorandum, and disregard Points V, VI, and VII thereof. II. LAW OF THE CASE DOES NOT APPLY ASH erroneously argues that the court s prior decision, granting ASH s motion to amend the complaint, which motion that pre-dated the Illowitzs participation in this case, now bars the Illowitzs instant motion to dismiss the amended complaint. The doctrine of law of the case contemplates that the parties had a "full and fair" opportunity to litigate the initial determination. Ramanathan v Aharon, 109 A.D.3d 529, 530 (2d Dep't 2013), quoting People v. Evans, 94 N.Y.2d 499, (2000) (citations omitted). Law of the case is necessarily "amorphous" in that it "directs a court's discretion," but does not restrict its authority. Id. On the exact factual posture of this case, the Appellate Division held: As a preliminary matter, we reject plaintiff's argument that the instant motion was precluded under the doctrine of law of the case by virtue of a prior order granting plaintiff leave to amend the complaint so as to add FedEx as a defendant. The doctrine of law of the case contemplates that the parties had a full and fair opportunity to litigate when the initial determination was made [People v Evans]. The motion court did not consider FedEx's opposition to plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint, since it was not a party to the case at the time, and thus FedEx was not precluded from moving to 2 4 of 16

5 dismiss the claims subsequently asserted against it in the amended complaint. Chanice v Federal Express Corp., 118 A.D.3d 634, 635 (1st Dep't 2014). See also Red Tulip, LLC v. Neiva, 44 A.D.3d 204, 209 n1 (1st Dep't 2007) ( Palm Beach makes the additional argument that our prior ruling in Anderson's injunction appeal [concerning the guaranty] should be binding on Neiva here, because she signed the same guaranty and has raised nearly identical defenses. However, given that Neiva was not directly involved in the injunction proceedings [and] did not participate therein, the doctrine of law of the case should not be applied [People v Evans]. ). Here, too, the Court did not consider the Ilowitzs opposition to plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint, since the Ilowitzs were not parties to the case at the time. Accordingly, the Ilowitzs are not precluded from moving to dismiss the claims subsequently asserted against them in the amended complaint. Further, even with respect to the Original Defendants: in determining whether law of the case applies, the procedural posture and evidentiary burdens of the litigants must be considered [denial of motion to dismiss does not establish law of the case because it looks only to the sufficiency of the pleadings]. Here, the procedural posture and evidentiary burdens of the parties at the time Feinberg moved to amend his complaint and at the time the defendants moved for JNOV were markedly different. Feinberg v Boros, 99 A.D.3d 219, 224 (1st Dep't 2012) (citations omitted) In the present matter, plaintiff s minimal burden on its prior motion to amend ( freely given unless proposed amendment is palpably insufficient as a matter of law or is totally devoid of merit (CPLR 3025 (b)), is not the same standard as on a motion to dismiss ( whether 3 5 of 16

6 the facts as alleged fit within any cognizable legal theory" (Sokoloff v. Harriman Estates Dev. Corp., 96 N.Y.2d 409, 414 (2001)). Accordingly, the Court s prior ruling on the motion to amend is not the law of the case with respect to the instant motion. III. THE RELATION BACK DOCTRINE DOES NOT APPLY A. The Ilowitzs and the Original Defendants Are Not United In Interest Notwithstanding the fact that ASH submitted a 42-page opposition brief, ASH does not respond to the case law adduced by Defendants, which consistently hold that there is no unity of interest for newly added tort-feasors. Def. MOL at ASH similarly does not respond to Defendants showing that the Illowitzs do not stand or fall together with the Original Defendants. Id. Instead, ASH merely cites two cases for the proposition that a newly-added party can be charged with notice of the original action. ASH Opp. at 16. Even if this were true, and even if the Illowitzs are charged with notice of the original lawsuit, that does not end the inquiry. As shown in Defendants moving papers (Def. MOL at 15-17), the relevant inquiry is whether the interest of the parties in the subject-matter is such that they stand or fall together and that judgment against one will similarly affect the other. In other words, the Illowitzs and the Original Defendants must necessarily have the same defenses to the plaintiff s claim. Defendants are not united in interest even if there is only the mere possibility that the new party could have a different defense than the original party. In cases like this one, where ASH seeks to introduce the Ilowitzs as new tort-feasors, New York courts consistently hold that there is no unity of interest. 4 6 of 16

7 Accordingly, Yaakov, Hadassah and Shaya Ilowitz are not united in interest with the Original Defendants with respect to ASH s causes of actions in tort (fraud, negligence, etc.), and the Relation Back Doctrine will not apply. Further, ASH s claims seeking to pierce Blackstone s corporate veil with respect to Yaakov and Hadassah similarly fails because, even if ASH succeeds against Blackstone, ASH must then prove the elements for piercing the corporate veil to reach Yaakov and Hadassah. As such, Yaakov and Hadassah have a potential defense not available to the Original Defendants, barring application of the Relation Back Doctrine. Accordingly, the Relation Back Doctrine cannot be applied with respect to the Ilowitzs, because ASH cannot satisfy its burden to prove the element of unity of interest. B. There Was No Mistake ASH s opposition on this point is not supported by any evidence. Instead, ASH s counsel states in his brief that: From the time that Plaintiff commenced this action in November 2012 through the date of the receipt of meaningful discovery in March 2015, Plaintiff... in particular, knew nothing about the relationship the various members of the Ilowitz family had with Blackstone. ASH Opp. at 6. Notably, ASH does not submit any party affirmation attesting to this, or to any of the facts stated by ASH s counsel in opposition to this motion. As counsel does not have personal knowledge of the facts, and counsel fails to cite the source of any allegations contained in his brief, the allegations should be struck. Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 563 (1980) (holding that the bare affirmation of... [an] attorney who demonstrated no personal knowledge... is without evidentiary value and thus unavailing."); American Tr. Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez, 41 Misc. 3d 1209(A), (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty. 2013) ( an affirmation by an attorney who is without the requisite knowledge of the facts has no probative value. ). 5 7 of 16

8 Even more, Defendants have conclusively shown, through ASH s own documents and correspondence produced in discovery, that at all relevant times, and as far back as March 2007, ASH knew of, communicated with, and took direction from Ilowitz concerning the transactions at issue in this litigation. Def. MOL at 5. ASH s counsel attempts to minimize this overwhelming evidence, stating that [n]one of those s identify or suggest in any manner that Yaakov is a principal or member of Blackstone, nor a participant in the insurance fraud. ASH Opp. at 24. In fact, the documents show, inter alia, that: On March 6, 2007, ASH took direction from Yaakov for the ultimate decision to move forward with the Chera applications; and On July 20, 2007, ASH specifically requested Yaakov to reply back with an I agree statement concerning a message from ASH s CEO and AXA to the broker on the [Chera] case. Def. MOL at 5. Thus, as far back as 2007, ASH was actively aware that Yaakov was the principal force behind Blackstone. ASH relied on Yaakov for the ultimate decisions concerning the transactions at issue. As noted, ASH does not (and cannot) submit a party affidavit to support its contention that it was unaware of the Ilowitzs when ASH filed suit in As set forth in Defendants moving brief (Def. MOL at 10-12), the Appellate Division has repeatedly and consistently held that, where a plaintiff knew or with proper due diligence should have known the existence of a potential defendant at the onset of an action, it has not made a mistake as to the identity of the correct defendant. ASH s failure to name the Ilowitzs was either a strategic decision, or gross negligence in failing to utilize information it ASH s own possession concerning the Ilowitzs. It was not a 6 8 of 16

9 mistake, and the Ilowitzs had every reason to believe that ASH chose not to sue them for good reason. See Def. MOL at Accordingly, the Relation Back Doctrine cannot be applied with respect to the Ilowitzs, because ASH cannot satisfy its burden to prove the element of mistake. IV. THERE WAS NO NEWLY DISCOVERED FRAUD ASH argues that the allegations against the Illowitzs were brought within two years of discovery, because, according to ASH s counsel, the Illowitzs identity and involvement in the fraud was not discovered and could not have been discovered, in the exercise of due diligence, until shortly before [ASH] moved to amend the Complaint. ASH Opp. at 25. Once again, we are left with a bald assertion by ASH s counsel, with no party affirmation supporting this claim. As stated above, the overwhelming evidence conclusively shows that ASH knew by 2007 that Blackstone operated through Yaakov Ilowitz, and ASH took direction and instruction from Yaakov in processing and submitting the Chera applications. At the very least, ASH had knowledge of facts which should have caused [it] to inquire and discover the alleged fraud. Baratta v. ABF Real Estate Co., 215 A.D.2d 518, 519 (2d Dep t 1995). ASH cannot meet its burden of establishing that the fraud could not have been discovered during the two-year period before the commencement of the action. Percoco v. Lesnak, 24 A.D.3d 427, (2d Dep t 2005). Since ASH was aware of the Ilowitzs involvement before, during, and after the accrual of ASH s cause of action, ASH s claims against the Ilowitzs are time barred by the six-year statute of limitations. 7 9 of 16

10 V. ASH HAS NOT PLED THE NECESSARY ELEMENTS TO PIERCE THE CORPORATE VEIL ASH s arguments to pierce the corporate veil should be disregarded, because they begin on page 26 of ASH s Opposition, in violation of this Court s rules. Even if the Court were to consider these arguments, they fail to state a cause of action. As set forth in Defendants moving brief, New York law disfavors disregard of the corporate form, and a party seeking to do so bears a "heavy burden." Piercing the corporate veil requires a showing that: (1) the owners exercised complete domination of the corporation in respect to the transaction attacked; and (2) that such domination was used to commit a fraud or wrong against the plaintiff which resulted in plaintiff's injury. Evidence of domination alone does not suffice without an additional showing that it led to inequity, fraud or malfeasance. The cases cited by ASH hold the same. In Grammas v Lockwood Assoc., LLC, 95 A.D.3d 1073, 1075 (2d Dep't 2012; emphasis supplied), the plaintiffs adequately pleaded allegations that Porcelli engaged in acts amounting to an abuse or perversion of the LLC form to perpetrate a wrong or injustice against the plaintiffs, including allegations that he dissolved Lockwood shortly after closing title to the property and that the defendants failed to reserve funds for the purposes of contingent liability. Grammas cites to the Court of Appeals decision, in East Hampton Union Free School Dist. v Sandpebble Bldrs., Inc., 16 N.Y.3d 775, 776 (2011; emphasis supplied), holding: In order for a plaintiff to state a viable claim against a shareholder of a corporation in his or her individual capacity for actions purportedly taken on behalf of the corporation, plaintiff must allege facts that, if proved, indicate that the shareholder exercised complete domination and control over the corporation and "abused the privilege of doing business in the corporate form to perpetrate a wrong or injustice." Since, by definition, a corporation acts through its officers and directors, to hold a shareholder/officer such as Canseco personally 8 10 of 16

11 liable, a plaintiff must do more than merely allege that the individual engaged in improper acts or acted in "bad faith" while representing the corporation. In this case, plaintiff failed to allege any facts indicating that Canseco engaged in acts amounting to an abuse or perversion of the corporate form, much less that the school district was harmed as a result of such actions. In another case cited by ASH, the court found that the individual engaged in acts amounting to an abuse of the privilege of doing business in that form so as to perpetrate a wrong or injustice against them. Baker, Sanders, Barshay, Grossman, Fass, Muhlstock & Neuworth, LLC v. Comprehensive Mental Assessment & Med. Care, P.C., 110 A.D.3d 1022, 1023 (2d Dep't 2013; emphasis supplied). Another case cited by ASH, Last Time Beverage Corp. v. F &V Distrib. Co., LLC, 98 A.D.3d 947 (2d Dep't 2012), is a prime example. In the lower case, defendants argued that the court erred in piercing the corporate veil, because the court failed to recognize that alter ego liability could not be present absent proof that Hornell's domination of F & V was used to commit a fraud or wrong against Plaintiffs that resulted in Plaintiffs' injury N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3477, 3-4 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 15, 2010). The court agreed that, as a matter of law, the individual s control of the corporation must be used to commit a... wrong that causes plaintiff's loss and confirmed that this correct legal standard has been recognized, cited, and applied, at every point in this proceeding. Id. Here, ASH has not pled the first element - that Defendants used their alleged domination of the corporation with respect to the shared commissions (the transaction attacked ). ASH has not pled the second element - that ASH was defrauded and harmed by Defendants domination of the corporation with respect to the shared commissions of 16

12 ASH s Opposition lists eight pages of allegations concerning the alleged fraud. ASH Opp. at The common denominator of all these allegations is that they do not allege that ASH was harmed in the subject transactions as a result of the Illowitzs purported abuse of the corporate form. At most, ASH alleges that, during discovery in this litigation, Defendants evaded and concealed the identity of the owners and members of Blackstone and concealed and confused the identity of its members in public filings. Even if true, such evasions and concealments bear no connection to the transaction attacked, and ASH has not alleged that such evasions and concealments harmed ASH with respect to the transactions attacked. See Pourquoi M.P.S., Inc. v. Worldstar Intl., Ltd., 91 A.D.3d 839, 840 (2d Dep't 2012) (no piercing because it was not demonstrated that principal used her domination of [corporation] with respect to the transactions at issue to commit a wrong against the plaintiff that caused its injury. ) (emphasis supplied); Aetna Elec. Distrib. Co. v. Homestead Elec., Ltd., 279 A.D.2d 541, (2d Dep't 2001) (corporate veil not pieced where domination was not used to commit a fraud or wrong against plaintiff); Schuyler v Sotheby's Intl. Realty, Inc., 2013 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4487, (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Oct. 2, 2013) (no allegations that defendants exercised such domination and control in respect to the transaction attacked and more importantly that they misused the corporate form to commit a wrong). Accordingly, ASH fails to plead the necessary elements to sustain a cause of action to pierce the corporate veil of 16

13 VI. CLAIMS AGAINST THE ILOWITZS INDIVIDUALLY ARE BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS The Court should disregard ASH s arguments that, independent of its claim to pierce the corporate veil, the Ilowitzs are individually liable for fraud. This argument begins on page 36 of ASH s Opposition, in violation of this Court s rules. Even if the Court were to consider these arguments, they fail for the same reasons set forth above. The six-year statute of limitations has passed, and the relation back doctrine does not apply. VII. ASH ILLEGALY SHARED THE COMMISSIONS WITH BLACKSTONE AND CANNOT NOW SUE FOR RECOUPMENT ASH s opposition to Defendants illegality argument should be disregarded, because it begins on page 37 of ASH s Opposition, in violation of this Court s rules. Even if the Court were to consider ASH s arguments, they are without merit. First, ASH focuses on the wrong provision of the Insurance Statute, and falsely accuses Defendants of misstating the applicable statute. ASH Opp. at 38. The applicable statute is New York Insurance Law 2114(a)(2) (emphasis supplied): No agent or other representative of any such life insurer or fraternal benefit society shall pay any commission or other compensation to any person for any services of the kind specified in paragraph one hereof, except to a licensed life insurance agent of such insurer or of such society as the case may be. The additional language cited by ASH is contained in 2114(a)(1), which applies to insurers (not agents) and is therefore inapplicable. The fact that 2114(a)(2), applying specifically to agents, omits the additional language or to an insurance broker underscores that of 16

14 an agent (such as ASH) may share commissions only with a licensed life insurance agent of such insurer (which Blackstone never was). ASH cites a February 28, 2003 Opinion of the General Counsel, which actually refutes ASH s position. That Opinion states that an agent, such as ASH: may share the commission with another New York licensed agent or broker for the referral of business on the placement of an insurance policy if the referring agent is licensed to sell that kind of insurance and is a licensed agent of the insurer that wrote the policy, or if the referring broker is licensed to write that kind of insurance... Otherwise, such referring agent or broker must be treated as any other non-licensed person under sections 2114, 2115 and Here, Blackstone was the referring agent or broker with whom ASH shared commissions. Since Blackstone was not a licensed agent of the insurer that wrote the policy and was not licensed to write insurance, Blackstone must be treated as any other non-licensed person with whom it is illegal to share commissions. The May 6, 2004 Opinion of the General Counsel, cited by ASH, does not specify the type of insurance at issue. 2114(a)(2) applies specifically to life insurance. 2114(a)(3) applies to health insurance and allows sharing commissions with a licensed insurance broker. The 5/6/04 Opinion must be addressing only the health insurance provision, which allows sharing commissions with a broker who is not a licensed agent of the insurer. This is not true for life insurance commissions, as expressly stated in 2114(a)(2). Further, ASH s disjointed arguments to distinguish Ziv v. Tellkamp, 117 A.D.3d 727 (2d Dep't 2014), fall flat. At first ASH argues that its damages consist of the commissions ASH returned to AXA when the policies were rescinded. ASH Opp. at 40. However, ASH was merely returning to AXA monies it received from AXA. Such return of monies received is not a loss. It merely returns ASH to its prior position of 16

15 Next ASH argues that it seeks return of funds it paid Blackstone (not AXA) and that, unlike Ziv, this claim is not based on breach of contract. ASH Opp. at However, Ziv dismissed not only a breach of contract claim, but also an unjust enrichment claim. Id. at 729. The specific cause of action is immaterial. Rather, as stated by the Court of Appeals, concerning an action for return of commissions paid to a broker, pursuant to an agreement for illegal sharing of commissions: [N]o court should be required to serve as paymaster of the wages of crime, or referee between thieves. Therefore, the law "will not extend its aid to either of the parties" or "listen to their complaints against each other, but will leave them where their own acts have placed them." Stone v. Freeman, 298 N.Y. 268, 271 (1948) (emphasis supplied). Finally, ASH attempt to portray its illegal activity as a non-serious violation, is belied by the explicit holding of the Second Department in Ziv and the Court of Appeals in Stone, which specifically address a violation of 2114 and illegal sharing of commissions, and consider such violations serious enough to dismiss the action and leave the parties where their own acts have left them. VIII. ASH CONCEDES NO CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST SHAYA ILOWITZ For the reasons stated in Defendants moving brief (Def. MOL at 17-18), which ASH does not oppose, ASH s causes of action against Shaya Ilowitz are deficient as a matter of law, and should be dismissed of 16

16 IX. ASH S CONCEDES ITS ALLEGATIONS ARE BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF FRAUDS For the reasons stated in Defendants moving brief (Def. MOL at 22-23), which ASH does not oppose, the oral agreement alleged by ASH falls within the Statute of Frauds and is unenforceable. Therefore, for the reasons stated in Defendants moving brief (Def. MOL at 24-26), which ASH does not oppose, the Statute of Frauds also bars ASH s alternate theories of liability (i.e., fraud, negligence, implied contract, unjust enrichment, and tortious interference), because they are all based upon the alleged oral agreement to share policy commissions and to return such commissions if the subject policy is rescinded. CONCLUSION For all the above-mentioned reasons, Defendants respectfully request that the Court dismiss ASH s Amended Complaint in its entirety. Dated: Kew Gardens, New York May 17, 2016 LIPSIUS-BENHAIM LAW, LLP Attorneys for Defendants By: Ira S. Lipsius Phillip M. Manela Kew Gardens Road, Suite 1030 Kew Gardens, New York (212) of 16

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 08/31/ :40 AM INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/31/2015

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 08/31/ :40 AM INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/31/2015 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 08/31/2015 11:40 AM INDEX NO. 022785/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 33 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/31/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS ASH BROKERAGE CORPORATION, -against-

More information

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/02/ :32 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/02/2016

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/02/ :32 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/02/2016 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 05/02/2016 04:32 PM INDEX NO. 514527/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/02/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS THE BOARD OF MANAGERS OF THE ONE

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/31/ :33 AM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 42 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/31/2018

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/31/ :33 AM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 42 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/31/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------- JFK HOTEL OWNER, LLC, Index No.: 652364/2017 -XX - against - Plaintiff, HON. GERALD LEBOVITS Part 7 TOURHERO,

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/21/ :07 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/21/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/21/ :07 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/21/2016 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/21/2016 0507 PM INDEX NO. 651546/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 45 RECEIVED NYSCEF 09/21/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION

More information

Broadway W. Enters., Ltd. v Doral Money, Inc NY Slip Op 32912(U) November 12, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011

Broadway W. Enters., Ltd. v Doral Money, Inc NY Slip Op 32912(U) November 12, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Broadway W. Enters., Ltd. v Doral Money, Inc. 213 NY Slip Op 32912(U) November 12, 213 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653638/211 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "3" identifier,

More information

JSBarkats PLLC v GoCom Corp. Inc NY Slip Op 32182(U) October 26, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen

JSBarkats PLLC v GoCom Corp. Inc NY Slip Op 32182(U) October 26, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen JSBarkats PLLC v GoCom Corp. Inc. 2016 NY Slip Op 32182(U) October 26, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 153644/2015 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/ :11 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 43 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2017

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/ :11 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 43 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X ALVIN DWORMAN, individually, and derivatively on behalf of CAPITAL

More information

Schuyler v Sotheby's Intl. Realty, Inc NY Slip Op 32384(U) October 2, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: O.

Schuyler v Sotheby's Intl. Realty, Inc NY Slip Op 32384(U) October 2, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2011 Judge: O. Schuyler v Sotheby's Intl. Realty, Inc. 2013 NY Slip Op 32384(U) October 2, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 112578/2011 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Matz v Aboulafia Law Firm, LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32147(U) October 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Kathryn E.

Matz v Aboulafia Law Firm, LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32147(U) October 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Kathryn E. Matz v Aboulafia Law Firm, LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 32147(U) October 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 155506/2016 Judge: Kathryn E. Freed Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Cane v Herman 2013 NY Slip Op 30226(U) January 18, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Barbara Jaffe Republished from New

Cane v Herman 2013 NY Slip Op 30226(U) January 18, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Barbara Jaffe Republished from New Cane v Herman 2013 NY Slip Op 30226(U) January 18, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 150342/11 Judge: Barbara Jaffe Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service. Search

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/27/ :15 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 7 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/27/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/27/ :15 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 7 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/27/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/27/2016 03:15 PM INDEX NO. 653343/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 7 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/27/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY ------------------------------------------------------------------------x

More information

Platinum Equity Advisors, LLC v SDI, Inc NY Slip Op 33993(U) July 18, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge:

Platinum Equity Advisors, LLC v SDI, Inc NY Slip Op 33993(U) July 18, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Platinum Equity Advisors, LLC v SDI, Inc. 2014 NY Slip Op 33993(U) July 18, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653709/2013 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Love v BMW of N. Am., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30528(U) February 21, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: /16 Judge: Kim Dollard Cases

Love v BMW of N. Am., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30528(U) February 21, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: /16 Judge: Kim Dollard Cases Love v BMW of N. Am., LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30528(U) February 21, 2017 Supreme Court, Richmond County Docket Number: 150653/16 Judge: Kim Dollard Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/30/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 30 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/30/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/30/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 30 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/30/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/30/2016 03:14 PM INDEX NO. 155091/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 30 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/30/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK JONATHAN HAYGOOD, -against-

More information

Ownit Mtge. Loan Trust v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc NY Slip Op 32303(U) December 7, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Ownit Mtge. Loan Trust v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc NY Slip Op 32303(U) December 7, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Ownit Mtge. Loan Trust v Merrill Lynch Mtge. Lending, Inc. 2015 NY Slip Op 32303(U) December 7, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 651370/2014 Judge: Marcy S. Friedman Cases posted with

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/10/ :36 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 72 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/10/2017

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/10/ :36 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 72 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/10/2017 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/10/2017 0136 PM INDEX NO. 655186/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 72 RECEIVED NYSCEF 05/10/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------

More information

Ehrhardt v EV Scarsdale Corp NY Slip Op 33910(U) August 23, 2012 Supreme Court, Westchester County Docket Number: 51856/12 Judge: Gerald E.

Ehrhardt v EV Scarsdale Corp NY Slip Op 33910(U) August 23, 2012 Supreme Court, Westchester County Docket Number: 51856/12 Judge: Gerald E. Ehrhardt v EV Scarsdale Corp. 2012 NY Slip Op 33910(U) August 23, 2012 Supreme Court, Westchester County Docket Number: 51856/12 Judge: Gerald E. Loehr Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/19/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 18 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/19/2017

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/19/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 18 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/19/2017 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/19/2017 0627 PM INDEX NO. 651715/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 18 RECEIVED NYSCEF 06/19/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IAS PART - - - - - - - - - -

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/14/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/14/2013 EXHIBIT H

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/14/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/14/2013 EXHIBIT H FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/14/2013 INDEX NO. 650910/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/14/2013 EXHIBIT H FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 05/14/2013 INDEX NO. 54031/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 20

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/09/ :06 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/09/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/09/ :06 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/09/2015 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/09/2015 11:06 PM INDEX NO. 850229/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/09/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------X

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/04/ :46 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/04/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/04/ :46 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/04/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/04/2016 08:46 PM INDEX NO. 158606/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/04/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------X

More information

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF NORMA LOREN'S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS' COUNTERCLAIMS

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF NORMA LOREN'S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANTS' COUNTERCLAIMS FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/15/2016 04:30 PM INDEX NO. 651052/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 30 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/15/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK NORMA LOREN, -v- Plaintiff,

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/31/ :48 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/31/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/31/ :48 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/31/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/31/2016 03:48 PM INDEX NO. 155839/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 8 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/31/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ROSOLINO AGRUSA, - against

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/13/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/13/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/13/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/13/2015 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/13/2015 1200 PM INDEX NO. 651708/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 23 RECEIVED NYSCEF 07/13/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK MDW FUNDING LLC and VERSANT

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/28/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 5 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/28/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 5 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/28/2016 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/28/2016 0500 PM INDEX NO. 651304/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 5 RECEIVED NYSCEF 04/28/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------

More information

FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 01/21/ :52 AM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 59 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/21/2016

FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 01/21/ :52 AM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 59 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/21/2016 FILED WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 01/21/2016 1152 AM INDEX NO. 70104/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 59 RECEIVED NYSCEF 01/21/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK WESTCHESTER COUNTY ------------------------------------X

More information

Amsterdam Assoc. LLC v Alianza LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 30156(U) January 15, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge:

Amsterdam Assoc. LLC v Alianza LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 30156(U) January 15, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: 2406-12 Amsterdam Assoc. LLC v Alianza LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 30156(U) January 15, 2014 Supreme Court, Ne York County Docket Number: 151120/2013 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted ith a "30000" identifier,

More information

Zadar Universal Corp. v Lemonis 2018 NY Slip Op 33125(U) November 26, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018 Judge: Gerald

Zadar Universal Corp. v Lemonis 2018 NY Slip Op 33125(U) November 26, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018 Judge: Gerald Zadar Universal Corp. v Lemonis 2018 NY Slip Op 33125(U) November 26, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 650902/2018 Judge: Gerald Lebovits Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Jemrock Enter. LLC v Konig 2013 NY Slip Op 32884(U) October 24, 2013 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Orin R.

Jemrock Enter. LLC v Konig 2013 NY Slip Op 32884(U) October 24, 2013 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Orin R. Jemrock Enter. LLC v Konig 2013 NY Slip Op 32884(U) October 24, 2013 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 703280/2013 Judge: Orin R. Kitzes Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/01/ :57 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/01/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/01/ :57 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/01/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 11/01/2016 06:57 PM INDEX NO. 654956/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 3 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/01/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK JEREMY WIESEN, Index No: 654956/2016

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/30/ :42 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 28 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/30/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/30/ :42 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 28 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/30/2015 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/30/2015 0542 PM INDEX NO. 452951/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 28 RECEIVED NYSCEF 10/30/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

More information

169 Bowery, LLC v Bowery Dev. Group, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 33377(U) January 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Joan A.

169 Bowery, LLC v Bowery Dev. Group, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 33377(U) January 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /10 Judge: Joan A. 169 Bowery, LLC v Bowery Dev. Group, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 33377(U) January 29, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 651102/10 Judge: Joan A. Madden Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

AFFIDAVIT / ATTORNEY'S AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF NOTIFICATION

AFFIDAVIT / ATTORNEY'S AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF NOTIFICATION AFFIDAVIT / ATTORNEY'S AFFIRMATION IN SUPPORT OF NOTIFICATION Instructions: Fill in the box below and the index number. Complete the blank spaces printed in bold below following the directions provided.

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/11/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/11/2013

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/11/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/11/2013 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/11/2013 INDEX NO. 650841/2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 26 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/11/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK GEM HOLDCO, LLC, -against- Plaintiff,

More information

Alksom Realty LLC v Baranik NY Slip Op 50869(U) Decided on June 9, Supreme Court, Kings County. Demarest, J.

Alksom Realty LLC v Baranik NY Slip Op 50869(U) Decided on June 9, Supreme Court, Kings County. Demarest, J. [*1] Alksom Realty LLC v Baranik 2015 NY Slip Op 50869(U) Decided on June 9, 2015 Supreme Court, Kings County Demarest, J. Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law 431.

More information

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v Webster Bus. Credit Corp NY Slip Op 33850(U) April 13, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2009 Judge: Richard

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v Webster Bus. Credit Corp NY Slip Op 33850(U) April 13, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2009 Judge: Richard Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v Webster Bus. Credit Corp. 2010 NY Slip Op 33850(U) April 13, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: 601680/2009 Judge: Richard B. Lowe III Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Spallone v Spallone 2014 NY Slip Op 32412(U) September 11, 2014 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted

Spallone v Spallone 2014 NY Slip Op 32412(U) September 11, 2014 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted Spallone v Spallone 2014 NY Slip Op 32412(U) September 11, 2014 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: 160061/2013 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

Carmody v City of New York 2018 NY Slip Op 33201(U) December 12, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Alexander M.

Carmody v City of New York 2018 NY Slip Op 33201(U) December 12, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Alexander M. Carmody v City of New York 2018 NY Slip Op 33201(U) December 12, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 150090/2016 Judge: Alexander M. Tisch Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/ :25 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 10 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2014

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/ :25 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 10 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/26/2014 FILED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/26/2014 0525 PM INDEX NO. 652450/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 10 RECEIVED NYSCEF 08/26/2014 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------x

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/19/ :58 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 53 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/19/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/19/ :58 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 53 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/19/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/19/2016 04:58 PM INDEX NO. 651587/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 53 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/19/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK PERSEUS TELECOM LTD., v.

More information

241 Fifth Ave. Hotel LLC v Nader & Sons LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31755(U) September 20, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012

241 Fifth Ave. Hotel LLC v Nader & Sons LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31755(U) September 20, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 241 Fifth Ave. Hotel LLC v Nader & Sons LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31755(U) September 20, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652082/2012 Judge: Jeffrey K. Oing Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., Inc. v Homestyle Dining, LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30065(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County

American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., Inc. v Homestyle Dining, LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30065(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., Inc. v Homestyle Dining, LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30065(U) January 4, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653369/2018 Judge: Joel M. Cohen Cases posted

More information

Kahlon v Creative Pool and Spa Inc NY Slip Op 30075(U) January 6, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Paul Wooten

Kahlon v Creative Pool and Spa Inc NY Slip Op 30075(U) January 6, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /12 Judge: Paul Wooten Kahlon v Creative Pool and Spa Inc. 2014 NY Slip Op 30075(U) January 6, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 652204/12 Judge: Paul Wooten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

Swift Strong, Ltd. v Miachart, LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31939(U) October 13, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Barry

Swift Strong, Ltd. v Miachart, LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31939(U) October 13, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Barry Swift Strong, Ltd. v Miachart, LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 31939(U) October 13, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653482/11 Judge: Barry Ostrager Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Outdoor Media Corp. v Del Mastro 2011 NY Slip Op 33922(U) November 16, 2011 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases

Outdoor Media Corp. v Del Mastro 2011 NY Slip Op 33922(U) November 16, 2011 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /11 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases Outdoor Media Corp. v Del Mastro 2011 NY Slip Op 33922(U) November 16, 2011 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: 650837/11 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

Frydman v Francese 2017 NY Slip Op 31069(U) May 15, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Cynthia S.

Frydman v Francese 2017 NY Slip Op 31069(U) May 15, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Cynthia S. Frydman v Francese 2017 NY Slip Op 31069(U) May 15, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 155477/2015 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

Rothman v RNK Capital, LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 31640(U) August 26, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Barbara Jaffe

Rothman v RNK Capital, LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 31640(U) August 26, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Barbara Jaffe Rothman v RNK Capital, LLC 2015 NY Slip Op 31640(U) August 26, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 150120/15 Judge: Barbara Jaffe Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

U.S. Bank Nat l Ass n v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. Index No /2011 Page 2 of 12

U.S. Bank Nat l Ass n v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. Index No /2011 Page 2 of 12 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: IAS PART THREE --------------------------------------------------------------------X U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, for HarborView

More information

Allaire v Mover 2014 NY Slip Op 32507(U) September 29, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Marcy S. Friedman Cases posted

Allaire v Mover 2014 NY Slip Op 32507(U) September 29, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Marcy S. Friedman Cases posted Allaire v Mover 2014 NY Slip Op 32507(U) September 29, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 650177/09 Judge: Marcy S. Friedman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

Power Air Conditioning Corp. v Batirest 229 LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30750(U) April 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016

Power Air Conditioning Corp. v Batirest 229 LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30750(U) April 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Power Air Conditioning Corp. v Batirest 229 LLC 2017 NY Slip Op 30750(U) April 13, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 156497/2016 Judge: Cynthia S. Kern Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Hahn v Congregation Mechina Mikdash Melech, Inc NY Slip Op 31517(U) July 11, 2013 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Mark

Hahn v Congregation Mechina Mikdash Melech, Inc NY Slip Op 31517(U) July 11, 2013 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Mark Hahn v Congregation Mechina Mikdash Melech, Inc. 2013 NY Slip Op 31517(U) July 11, 2013 Sup Ct, Kings County Docket Number: 500608/2012 Judge: Mark I. Partnow Republished from New York State Unified Court

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2014 INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2014

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2014 INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2014 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/22/2014 INDEX NO. 650099/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 21 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/22/2014 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK KIMBERLY SLAYTON, Petitioner, Index

More information

August 30, A. Introduction

August 30, A. Introduction August 30, 2013 The New Jersey Supreme Court Limits The Use Of Equitable Estoppel As A Basis To Compel Arbitration Of Claims Against A Person That Is Not A Signatory To An Arbitration Agreement A. Introduction

More information

K2 Promotions, LLC v New York Marine & Gen. Ins. Co NY Slip Op 31036(U) June 15, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14

K2 Promotions, LLC v New York Marine & Gen. Ins. Co NY Slip Op 31036(U) June 15, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14 K2 Promotions, LLC v New York Marine & Gen. Ins. Co. 2015 NY Slip Op 31036(U) June 15, 2015 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652737/14 Judge: Jennifer G. Schecter Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/24/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/24/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/24/ :27 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/24/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/24/2016 12:27 PM INDEX NO. 651454/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/24/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK CRICKET STOCKHOLDER REP,

More information

Amerimax Capital, LLC v Ender 2017 NY Slip Op 30263(U) February 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Manuel J.

Amerimax Capital, LLC v Ender 2017 NY Slip Op 30263(U) February 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Manuel J. Amerimax Capital, LLC v Ender 2017 NY Slip Op 30263(U) February 10, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 158057/2015 Judge: Manuel J. Mendez Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

RICHARD J. MONTELIONE, J.:

RICHARD J. MONTELIONE, J.: CIVIL COURT OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS: PART 41 Z.M.S. & Y. Acupuncture, P.C., a/a/o Nicola Farauharson, -against- Geico General Insurance Co., Plaintiff, Defendant. RICHARD J. MONTELIONE,

More information

Patapova v Duncan Interiors, Inc NY Slip Op 33013(U) November 27, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Joan A.

Patapova v Duncan Interiors, Inc NY Slip Op 33013(U) November 27, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2010 Judge: Joan A. Patapova v Duncan Interiors, Inc. 2013 NY Slip Op 33013(U) November 27, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 652188/2010 Judge: Joan A. Madden Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/27/ :37 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/27/2018

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/27/ :37 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/27/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK --.-------- --------------------------------------------------------X LISA WILDENBERGER and BRIAN CASHIN, Plaintiffs ' AFFIRMATION IN REPLY Index

More information

Fundamental Long Term Care Holdings, LLC v Cammeby's Funding, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32113(U) August 30, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number:

Fundamental Long Term Care Holdings, LLC v Cammeby's Funding, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32113(U) August 30, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: Fundamental Long Term Care Holdings, LLC v Cammeby's Funding, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32113(U) August 30, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 650332/2011 Judge: O Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

Carlyle, LLC v Quik Park 1633 Garage LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 32476(U) December 15, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge:

Carlyle, LLC v Quik Park 1633 Garage LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 32476(U) December 15, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /15 Judge: Carlyle, LLC v Quik Park 1633 Garage LLC 2016 NY Slip Op 32476(U) December 15, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653347/15 Judge: Anil C. Singh Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Logan Bus Co., Inc. v Auerbach 2015 NY Slip Op 31766(U) August 5, 2015 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: /2014 Judge: Orin R.

Logan Bus Co., Inc. v Auerbach 2015 NY Slip Op 31766(U) August 5, 2015 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: /2014 Judge: Orin R. Logan Bus Co., Inc. v Auerbach 2015 NY Slip Op 31766(U) August 5, 2015 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 703717/2014 Judge: Orin R. Kitzes Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY

More information

Matter of Empire State Bldg. Assoc., LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 31900(U) July 17, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: O.

Matter of Empire State Bldg. Assoc., LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 31900(U) July 17, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: O. Matter of Empire State Bldg. Assoc., LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 31900(U) July 17, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 654456/2013 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Li Ping Xie v Jang 2012 NY Slip Op 33871(U) February 28, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2008E Judge: Paul G.

Li Ping Xie v Jang 2012 NY Slip Op 33871(U) February 28, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2008E Judge: Paul G. Li Ping Xie v Jang 2012 NY Slip Op 33871(U) February 28, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 117222/2008E Judge: Paul G. Feinman Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip

More information

Saxon Tech., LLC v Wesley Clover Solutions-N. Am., Inc NY Slip Op 30002(U) January 2, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Saxon Tech., LLC v Wesley Clover Solutions-N. Am., Inc NY Slip Op 30002(U) January 2, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Saxon Tech., LLC v Wesley Clover Solutions-N. Am., Inc. 2014 NY Slip Op 30002(U) January 2, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652169/2013 Judge: Shirley Werner Kornreich Cases posted with

More information

C and J Brothers, Inc. v Hunts Point Terminal Produce Coop. Assoc., Inc NY Slip Op 30669(U) March 16, 2016 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket

C and J Brothers, Inc. v Hunts Point Terminal Produce Coop. Assoc., Inc NY Slip Op 30669(U) March 16, 2016 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket C and J Brothers, Inc. v Hunts Point Terminal Produce Coop. Assoc., Inc. 2016 NY Slip Op 30669(U) March 16, 2016 Supreme Court, Bronx County Docket Number: 302074/12 Judge: Ruben Franco Cases posted with

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/12/2013 INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2013

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/12/2013 INDEX NO /2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2013 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/12/2013 INDEX NO. 653787/2012 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 65 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/12/2013 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK HOME EQUITY MORTGAGE TRUST SERIES

More information

FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 01/12/ :42 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 46 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/12/2018

FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 01/12/ :42 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 46 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/12/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU ----------------------------------------------------X LAURA STAGNITTA, Plaintiff ' -against- MANCHESTER I, LLC., X Oh EUMEM REOUESTED REPLY AFFIRMATION

More information

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department

State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department State of New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Judicial Department Decided and Entered: December 20, 2018 526578 CHARLES W. DOLLER, v Appellant, DAVID J. PRESCOTT et al., Respondents. MEMORANDUM

More information

Canon Fin. Servs., Inc. v Meyers Assoc., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 32519(U) September 26, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013

Canon Fin. Servs., Inc. v Meyers Assoc., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 32519(U) September 26, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Canon Fin. Servs., Inc. v Meyers Assoc., LP 2014 NY Slip Op 32519(U) September 26, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 650613/2013 Judge: Debra A. James Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Schon Family Found. v Brinkley Capital Ltd NY Slip Op 33027(U) November 27, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015

Schon Family Found. v Brinkley Capital Ltd NY Slip Op 33027(U) November 27, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Schon Family Found. v Brinkley Capital Ltd. 2018 NY Slip Op 33027(U) November 27, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653664/2015 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

INDEX NO /2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 595 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2011

INDEX NO /2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 595 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2011 INDEX NO. 104675/2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 595 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/30/2011 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK -------------------------------------------------------------------------x

More information

U.S. Sec. Assoc., Inc. v Cresante 2016 NY Slip Op 31886(U) October 7, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen A.

U.S. Sec. Assoc., Inc. v Cresante 2016 NY Slip Op 31886(U) October 7, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2015 Judge: Eileen A. U.S. Sec. Assoc., Inc. v Cresante 2016 NY Slip Op 31886(U) October 7, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 161144/2015 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Lam Platt St. Hotel LLC v Golden Pearl Constr. LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 33018(U) November 29, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number:

Lam Platt St. Hotel LLC v Golden Pearl Constr. LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 33018(U) November 29, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Lam Platt St. Hotel LLC v Golden Pearl Constr. LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 33018(U) November 29, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 650981/2017 Judge: Saliann Scarpulla Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

Swezey v Michael C. Dina Co., Inc NY Slip Op 31098(U) June 13, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14 Judge: Robert R.

Swezey v Michael C. Dina Co., Inc NY Slip Op 31098(U) June 13, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /14 Judge: Robert R. Swezey v Michael C. Dina Co., Inc. 2016 NY Slip Op 31098(U) June 13, 2016 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 158793/14 Judge: Robert R. Reed Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

OCS Dev. Group, LLC v Midtown Four Stones LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30129(U) January 11, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018

OCS Dev. Group, LLC v Midtown Four Stones LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30129(U) January 11, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2018 OCS Dev. Group, LLC v Midtown Four Stones LLC 2019 NY Slip Op 30129(U) January 11, 2019 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 653525/2018 Judge: Jennifer G. Schecter Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

Lithe Method LLC v YHD 18 LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 33195(U) December 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A.

Lithe Method LLC v YHD 18 LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 33195(U) December 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Judge: Eileen A. Lithe Method LLC v YHD 18 LLC 2014 NY Slip Op 33195(U) December 3, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 650759/2013 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e.,

More information

Rhodes v Presidential Towers Residence, Inc NY Slip Op 33445(U) November 20, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017

Rhodes v Presidential Towers Residence, Inc NY Slip Op 33445(U) November 20, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017 Rhodes v Presidential Towers Residence, Inc. 2018 NY Slip Op 33445(U) November 20, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 150935/2017 Judge: David Benjamin Cohen Cases posted with a "30000"

More information

Bloostein v Morrison Cohen LLP 2017 NY Slip Op 31238(U) June 7, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Anil C.

Bloostein v Morrison Cohen LLP 2017 NY Slip Op 31238(U) June 7, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Anil C. Bloostein v Morrison Cohen LLP 2017 NY Slip Op 31238(U) June 7, 2017 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 651242/2012 Judge: Anil C. Singh Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY

More information

Benedetto v Mercer 2012 NY Slip Op 33347(U) July 30, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Ellen M.

Benedetto v Mercer 2012 NY Slip Op 33347(U) July 30, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: Ellen M. Benedetto v Mercer 2012 NY Slip Op 33347(U) July 30, 2012 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 150122/2012 Judge: Ellen M. Coin Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U),

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/10/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 42 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/10/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/10/ :54 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 42 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/10/2015 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/10/2015 11:54 PM INDEX NO. 653564/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 42 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/10/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------X

More information

SHORT FORM ORDER SUPREME COURT-STATE OF NEW YORK PRESENT: HON. BRUCE D. Plaintiff,

SHORT FORM ORDER SUPREME COURT-STATE OF NEW YORK PRESENT: HON. BRUCE D. Plaintiff, SHORT FORM ORDER SUPREME COURT-STATE OF NEW YORK PRESENT: HON. BRUCE D. ALPERT Justice TRIAL/IA& PART 7 LISA J. PIETRO f/k/a LISA LOGAN, Plaintiff, -against- Index No. 674/03 Motion Date: May 16,2003 RAMPART

More information

Defendants x The following papers having been read on the motion: [numbered

Defendants x The following papers having been read on the motion: [numbered SHORT FORM ORDER SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Present: Hon F. Dana Winslow, Justice 5-w IAS/TRIAL PART 17 NASSAU COUNTY --against- Plaintiff, Index # 4662/01 EUGENE IOVINE, INC., TRIPLE I ELECTRICAL

More information

FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 12/22/ :59 AM

FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 12/22/ :59 AM INDEX NO. 603813/2015 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 12/22/2015 09:59 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/22/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NASSAU No. 603813/2015 HENRY DIGIOVANNI,

More information

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P : : : : : : : : : : : : : :

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P : : : : : : : : : : : : : : NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P 65.37 ISLAMIC SOCIETY OF GREATER VALLEY FORGE v. BUILDING CONTRACTORS INTERNATIONAL, LTD and JOHN COCIVERA and GARIG VANDERVELDT (MD) and GINA VANDERVELDT

More information

Matter of Goyal v Vintage India NYC, LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 31926(U) August 7, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017 Judge: O.

Matter of Goyal v Vintage India NYC, LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 31926(U) August 7, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2017 Judge: O. Matter of Goyal v Vintage India NYC, LLC 2018 NY Slip Op 31926(U) August 7, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 657004/2017 Judge: O. Peter Sherwood Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

Shi v Shaolin Temple 2011 NY Slip Op 33821(U) July 1, 2011 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 20167/09 Judge: Denis J. Butler Cases posted with a

Shi v Shaolin Temple 2011 NY Slip Op 33821(U) July 1, 2011 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 20167/09 Judge: Denis J. Butler Cases posted with a Shi v Shaolin Temple 2011 NY Slip Op 33821(U) July 1, 2011 Sup Ct, Queens County Docket Number: 20167/09 Judge: Denis J. Butler Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are

More information

Safka Holdings, LLC v 220 W. 57th St. Ltd Partnership 2014 NY Slip Op 31224(U) May 5, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013

Safka Holdings, LLC v 220 W. 57th St. Ltd Partnership 2014 NY Slip Op 31224(U) May 5, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2013 Safka Holdings, LLC v 220 W. 57th St. Ltd Partnership 2014 NY Slip Op 31224(U) May 5, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 652371/2013 Judge: Eileen Bransten Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/ :00 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2015 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 10/27/2015 09:00 PM INDEX NO. 651992/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 66 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/27/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK NEW YORK COUNTY -----------------------------------------------------------------------X

More information

Nelson v Patterson 2010 NY Slip Op 31799(U) July 12, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished from New York

Nelson v Patterson 2010 NY Slip Op 31799(U) July 12, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: /09 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished from New York Nelson v Patterson 2010 NY Slip Op 31799(U) July 12, 2010 Sup Ct, NY County Docket Number: 100948/09 Judge: Joan A. Madden Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service. Search

More information

17 th Annual New York City Bankruptcy Conference: Governed by New York Law? Considering the Impact of New York State Law in Bankruptcy Matters

17 th Annual New York City Bankruptcy Conference: Governed by New York Law? Considering the Impact of New York State Law in Bankruptcy Matters 17 th Annual New York City Bankruptcy Conference: Governed by New York Law? Considering the Impact of New York State Law in Bankruptcy Matters Why Lawyers Need to Pay More Attention to the Distinctions

More information

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/02/ /16/ :25 04:16 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/02/2016

FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/02/ /16/ :25 04:16 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/02/2016 FILED: KINGS COUNTY CLERK 11/02/2016 12/16/2016 03:25 04:16 PM INDEX NO. 508589/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 50 71 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 11/02/2016 12/16/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF KINGS

More information

Analisa Salon Ltd. v Elide Prop. LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34125(U) July 22, 2011 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 7582/05 Judge: Orazio R.

Analisa Salon Ltd. v Elide Prop. LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34125(U) July 22, 2011 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 7582/05 Judge: Orazio R. Analisa Salon Ltd. v Elide Prop. LLC 2011 NY Slip Op 34125(U) July 22, 2011 Sup Ct, Westchester County Docket Number: 7582/05 Judge: Orazio R. Bellantoni Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013

More information

American Express Bank, FSB v Katshihtis 2013 NY Slip Op 30473(U) February 19, 2013 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 9833/2011 Judge:

American Express Bank, FSB v Katshihtis 2013 NY Slip Op 30473(U) February 19, 2013 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 9833/2011 Judge: American Express Bank, FSB v Katshihtis 2013 NY Slip Op 30473(U) February 19, 2013 Supreme Court, Queens County Docket Number: 9833/2011 Judge: Robert J. McDonald Republished from New York State Unified

More information

Burnett v Pourgol 2010 NY Slip Op 30250(U) January 26, 2010 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 13130/09 Judge: Stephen A.

Burnett v Pourgol 2010 NY Slip Op 30250(U) January 26, 2010 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 13130/09 Judge: Stephen A. Burnett v Pourgol 2010 NY Slip Op 30250(U) January 26, 2010 Supreme Court, Nassau County Docket Number: 13130/09 Judge: Stephen A. Bucaria Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/27/ :20 PM INDEX NO /2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 103 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2017

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/27/ :20 PM INDEX NO /2010 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 103 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/27/2017 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: IAS PART 48 X PHOENIX CONTRACTING GROUP, INC., Index No.: 651193/2010 -against- Plaintiff, NOTICE OF APPEAL WEST END ENTERPRISES, LLC, WEST 60

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/08/ :19 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/08/2016

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/08/ :19 PM INDEX NO /2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/08/2016 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/08/2016 04:19 PM INDEX NO. 652943/2016 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 25 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/08/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK X Index No. 652943-2016 DANA

More information

Jaeckle v Jurasin 2018 NY Slip Op 32463(U) October 1, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Kathryn E.

Jaeckle v Jurasin 2018 NY Slip Op 32463(U) October 1, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2016 Judge: Kathryn E. Jaeckle v Jurasin 2018 NY Slip Op 32463(U) October 1, 2018 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 654282/2016 Judge: Kathryn E. Freed Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op

More information

M. Slavin & Sons, LTD v Penny Port, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32054(U) August 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge:

M. Slavin & Sons, LTD v Penny Port, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32054(U) August 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: /2012 Judge: M. Slavin & Sons, LTD v Penny Port, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 32054(U) August 29, 2013 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 157502/2012 Judge: Eileen A. Rakower Cases posted with a "30000" identifier,

More information

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2015

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/ :14 PM INDEX NO /2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2015 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/15/2015 06:14 PM INDEX NO. 652396/2014 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 67 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/15/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK JOHN HARADA, Index No. 652396/2014

More information