FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/01/ :41 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/01/2016. Exhibit C

Transcription

1 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 08/01/ :41 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 31 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/01/2016 Exhibit C

2 JEFFREY G. STEINBERG KEVIN F. CAVALIERE STEINBERG & CAVALIERE, LLP SO MAIN STREET WHITE PLAINS, NY IO6O6 TELEPHONE: ( FACSIMILE: ( WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER STEVEN A. COPLOFF (914) RONALD W. WEINER BENJAMIN 2ELERMYER JAMES F. CREIGHTON ROBERT P. PAGANO C. WILLIAM YANUCK VERONICA A, ZUNNO Scott M. Himes, Esq. BALLARD SPAHR LLP 919 Third Avenue, 37 th Floor New York, New York Dear Scott: June 10, 2016 Re: HNLVI v. Gildea S&C File No.: In response to your s of May 27 th and June 2 nd, please be advised as follows: (1) We are producing herewith Gildea's entire file regarding Human Nature on a CD. (2) Mr. Gildea does not have records regarding Chase Bank account no. xl72. That account was maintained by Aruba Productions. (3) Records for Gildea & Ivanis LLP Special Account (Chase account x4065), insofar as they relate to HNEUS, have been or are being produced herewith. (4) Documents pertaining to defendants' services for HNEUS have been produced. Defendants have no documents regarding services for Mr. Choueka. (5) Defendants have no documents pertaining to the accounting/bookkeeping software and programs used for HNEUS. Aruba Productions would have any such documents. (6) Defendants have no documents pertaining to All City Family Health and FWC US/Australia other than those that have been produced or are being produced herewith.

3 Scott M. Himes, Esq. 2 June 10, 2016 We are also producing herewith our response to your interrogatories. SAC:fc Enclosures Steven A. Coploff CC: THOMAS H. BAER, ESQ. 712 Fifth Avenue, 34 th Floor New York, New York S&C#

4 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK HUMAN NATURE LAS VEGAS INC., individually and derivatively on Behalf of H.N. ENTERTAINMENT US LLC -against- Plaintiff SCOTT GILDEA, GILDEA & IVANIS LLP and DANIEL CHOUEKA, X Index No /2015 VERIFIED RESPONSE OF DEFENDANTS SCOTT GILDEA AND GILDEA & IVANIS LLP TO PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES Defendants H.N. ENTERTAINMENT US LLC Nominal Defendant. X Assigned Justice: Hon. Eileen A. Rakower J.S.C. Pursuant to CPLR Rule 3133(a), defendants Scott Gildea and Gildea & Ivanis LLP, as and for their Response to Plaintiff's Interrogatories, dated May 26, 2016, respond as follows: GENERAL OBJECTIONS 1. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they seek discovery of documents or information subject to the attorney-client privilege, or protected from discovery by the work product doctrine or prepared in anticipation of litigation or for the trial of this matter.

5 2. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they seek discovery of documents or information not in the possession, custody or control of defendants. 3. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they seek discovery of documents or information not relevant to this action and/or that they are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 4. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they assume facts which are inaccurate or argumentative or assume defendants are cognizant of information known only to others. 5. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they would require defendants in responding thereto to draw legal or other conclusions or conclusions as to the legal effect of certain information or documents. 6. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they are so confusing or vague as not to be susceptible to a reasoned interpretation or response or to the extent that they are indefinite as to time or as to scope or are otherwise defective in form. 2

6 7. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they are unduly burdensome and oppressive, annoying and harassing, and would place upon defendants an unreasonable burden of inquiry, or to the extent that the information or documents sought are as readily accessible to plaintiff as they are to defendants. 8. Defendants object to plaintiff's interrogatories to the extent that they seek documents or information which are outside the scope of permissible discovery under the Civil Procedure Law and Rules of the State of New York. 9. Defendants expressly reserve and maintain any and all objections they may have for the trial of this action as to the relevancy, materiality or propriety of the discovery sought in plaintiff's interrogatories and to the admissibility or use of information or documents supplied by defendants in their responses herein. Defendants further reserve their right to amend, modify or otherwise change their responses herein if additional or other information becomes available to them or otherwise. INTERROGATORIES Interrogatory No. 1 Describe the purpose and reason for each of the transfers of money set forth in paragraph 35 of the Complaint. 3

7 Response expressly without waiving same, each transfer was made in accordance with the client's request. Interrogatory No. 2 Identify all persons with knowledge of each of the transfers of money set forth in paragraph 35 of the Complaint, including but not limited to the purpose and reason for each of the transfers. Response expressly without waiving same, Daniel Choueka ("Choueka"), Scott Gildea ("Gildea") and Linda Collazo. Interrogatory No. 3 Identify the transferees "Transfer Dr.," "All City Family Health," and "FWC US/Australia LLC" as set forth in paragraph 35 of the Complaint. Answer expressly without waiving same, "Transfer Dr." was Reach Out Entertainment LLC, "All City Family Health" is an entity set up by Choueka, and "FWC US/Australia LLC" is an entity set up by Choueka and Aruba Productions. 4

8 Interrogatory No. 4 Identify all persons who gave approval of or consent for each of the transfers of money set forth in paragraph 35 of the Complaint. Answer expressly without waiving same, Choueka and Gildea. Interrogatory No. 5 Identify or produce all documents relating to your answers to Interrogatories 1-4. Answer expressly without waiving same, and to the extent not heretofore produced, such documents are being produced herewith (SC through SC-0OOGO418). Interrogatory No. 6 Identify all persons consulted in responding to these Interrogatories or who provided information for or participated in responding to them. 5

9 Answer expressly without waiving same, Gildea and counsel. Dated: White Plains, 1 lew York June 10, 2016 STEINBERG & CAVALIERE, LLP TO: Scott M. Himes, Esq. BALLARD SPAHR LLP Attorneys for Plaintiff 919 Third Avenue, 3 7 th Floor New York, New York THOMAS H. BAER, ESQ. Attorney for Plaintiff 712 Fifth Avenue, 34 th Floor New York, New York Steven A. Coploff' Attorneys for Defender Scott Gildea and Gildea & Ivanis LLP 50 Main Street, 9 th Floor White Plains, New York (914) steincav@aol.com S&C#0O

10 STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss. : COUNTY OF WESTCHESTER ) VERIFICATION STEVEN A. COPLOFF, an attorney duly admitted to practice law in the State of New York, hereby affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury: 1. I am counsel to the law firm of Steinberg & Cavaliere, LLP, attorneys for defendants Scott Gildea and Gildea & Ivanis LLP in the captioned action. 2. I have read the annexed Response to Interrogatories and know the contents thereof, and the same is true to my knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information and belief and, as to those matters, I believe it to be true. 3. My belief as to those matters therein not stated upon personal knowledge is based upon a review of the file maintained in my office relative to this action, discussions with my client, and a review of the pleadings, papers and proceedings in this matter to date.

11 4. I make this verification instead of the responding defendants because the responding defendants are not located within the county wherein your affirmant maintains his office. Dated: White Plains, New York June 10, 2016 S&C#