FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/21/ :42 AM INDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 109 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/21/2018

Transcription

1 SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK KWANG YOUNG CHUN, ndex No.: /2017 Plaintiff, Hon. Andrea Masley - against - AS Part 48 SARAH HASTED and JOSEPH KRAEUTLFR, AMENDED ndividually and d/b/a HASTED KRAEUTLER, NOTCE OF APPEAL Defendants. PLEASE TAKE NOTCE that pursuant to Article 55 of the CPLR, defendant JOSEPH KRAEUTLER ("Kraeutler") hereby appeals to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Judicial Department, from the Decision and Order of this Court, dated April 3, 2018 and so ordered on May 21, 2018, which was duly entered in the office of the Clerk of this Court on May 21, 2018, where Notice of Entry was filed on May 22, 2018, which v a s ~ i nor n svi sr mt' i a a i ra denied Kraeutler's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint ~ (the "Complaint" "Complaint") in this action as against Kraeutler, and granted plaintiff KWANG YOUNG (" Plaintiff" CHUN's ("Plaintiff") cross-motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1) and (5), and CPLR 3212(a), (b), (c) and (g) granting summary judgment on liability only in Plaintiff's favor and against Kraeutler. This amendment replaces co-defendant Sarah Hasted from being Pro Se to identifying Ms. Hasteds new counsel, and also identified the separate Notice of Appeal and pre-argument Statement filed by Ms. Hasted's new counsel v v.3 1 of 42

2 Dated: New York, New York June 21, 2018 DAVDOFF HUTCHER & CTRON LLP By: TO: EÁrry Hutcher Krakowsky Q5 Third Avenue NewYork, pew York (212) Attorneys for Defendant/Appellant Joseph Kraeutler Michael A. Rosenberg, Esq. of counsel Roger Pierro, Jr., Esq Bell Boulevard, Suite 300 Bayside, New York (718) Attorneys for Plaintiff Melissa A. Peña, Esq. Norris McLaughlin & Marcus, P.A. 875 Third Ave 8th Floor New York, New York (917) Attorneys for co-defendant/co-appellant Sarah Hasted v,2 2 of 42

3 NDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF FLEDDOC. NO. NEW109YORK COUNTY CLERK 05f22/ PM) RECEVED NYSCEF: 06/21/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x KWANG YOUNG CHUN, ndex No /17 Plaintiff, -against- NOTCE OF ENTRY SARAH HASTED and JOSEPH KRAEUTLER, ndividually and d/b/a HASTED KRAEUTLER, x Defendant. PLEASE TAKE NOTCE that the within is a true copy of a Transcript of Hearing and Decision dated April 3, 2018 and So Ordered on May 21, 2018 and entered in the office of the clerk of the within named Court on May 21, Dated: Queens, New York May 22, 2018 / / ROGER PE O, JR. Pursuant to 22 NYCRR , the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in t e ourts of New York State, certifies that, upon information and belief and reasonable inquiry, the contentio contai e in the annexed document are not frivolous. ROGER PE O, JR. TO: Ralph Gerstein, Esq. Attorney for the Defendant Sarah Hasted 12 Canoe Brook Drive West Windsor, New Jersey Joseph Kraeutler Defendant Pro Se 248 Lafayette Avenue Brooklyn, New York of 37 3 of 42

4 n" f FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05 2 NY S CE F DeSJRLEME COURT OF THE STATEUFERE S 5/22/2018 NEW YORK COUNTY e PRESENT: HON. ANDREA MASLEY Justice PART f ndex Number : /2017 CHUN, KWANG YOUNG NDEX NO. vs. HASTED, SARAH MOTON DATE SEQUENCE NUMBER : 002 MOTON SEQ. NO. MOTON TO DSMSS The following papers, numbered 1 to, were read on this motion to/for Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause - Affidavits - Exhibits No(s). Answering Affidavits - Exhibits ) No(s). Replying Affidavits i No(s). Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that this motion is ~gc +CJOY. ' b crr g~. v gc JOE g~jdc g ~+dc CJ/ Q D ~ V o5 cn 2Z p0 m 0 LU 2 g ~o) ~ o0 O u. QJ x 0 Dated, J.S.C. 1. CHECK ONE:... CASE DSPOSED ÊNON-FNAL DSPOSTON...,..MOTON..., MOTON ON 2. CHECK AS APPROPRATE:...MOTON S: O GRANTED O DENED RANTED (N PART O OTHER 3. CHECK F APPROPRATE:... O SETTLE ORDER O SUBMT ORDER O DO NOT POST O FDUCARY APPONTMENT REFERENCE octa- 2j. (xff 3i7 3i'1 4 of 42

5 [FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY sclerk CLZ 0 572E/ EOi 019é53 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018 / P SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - CVL TERM - PART X â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â â KWANG YOUNG CHUN, Plaintiff, -against- ndex No /17 SARAH HASTED and JOSEPH KRAEUTLER, ndividually and 7 d/b/a HASTED KRAEUTLER, 8 Defendants X Centre Street New York, New York 10 April 3, B E F 0 R E: HONORABLE ANDREA MASLEY, 12 Supreme Court Justice 13 A P P E A R A N C E S: 14 MCHAEL A. ROSENBERG, ESQ., of counsel ROGER PERRO, JR., ESQ. 15 Attorneys for the Plaintiff Bell Boulevard - Suite Bayside, New York RALPH GERSTEN, ESQ. 18 Attorney for the Defendant SARAH HASTED Canoe Brook Drive 20 West Windsor, New Jersey JOSEPH KRAEUTLER Defendant Pro Se Lafayette Avenue 23 Brooklyn, New York Diane Kavanaugh, RPR Senior Court Reporter of 34 5 of 42

6 NDEX NO /2017 NYSCEF FLED DOC. : NO. NEW109YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/22 / : 53 PM RECEVED NYSCEF: 06/21/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x KWANG YOUNG CHUN, ndex No /17 -against- Plaintiff, SARAH HASTED and JOSEPH KRAEUTLER, ndividually and d/b/a HASTED KRAEUTLER, X Defendant. NOTCE OF ENTRY OF TRANSCRPT AND DECSON AND ORDER ROGER PERRO, JR., ESQ. Attorneys for Plaintiff Bell Boulevard, Suite 300 Bayside, New York (718) racer@pierro-law.com uf' of 37 6 of 42

7 FLED : NEW YORK COUÑÍ C~z Ò5Ñ2M05Â E 59 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ THE COURT: Good morning. n the matter of 3 Chun against Hasted and Kraeutler. 4 Who is here for the plaintiff? 5 MR. ROSENBERG: Good morning, your Honor. 6 Michael Rosenberg, of counsel to Roger Pierro, my 7 colleague to the left, wish the Court happy holidays, 8 on behalf of the plaintiff Chun. 9 THE COURT: Thank you. 10 MR. PERRO: Roger Pierro, along with 11 Mr. Rosenberg. 12 MR. GERSTEN: Ralph Gerstein, attorney for 13 defendant, Sarah Hasted. 14 MR. KRAEUTLER: Good morning.. Joseph 15 Kraeutler. 16 MR. GERSTEN: Sorry for walking in late. 17 wanted to grab some water. We may be here for a while. 18 THE COURT: t's ' okay. But thank you. 19 Mr. Kraeutler, where is your attorney? 20 MR. KRAEUTLER: He no longer represents me. 21 THE COURT: So you are representing yourself? 22 MR. KRAEUTLER: am forced to, yes. attorney' 23 THE COURT: Are you an attorney? 24 MR. KRAEUTLER: am not. 25 THE COURT: So you are representing yourself. 26 There are no corporations, LLCs or otherwise in this of 34 7 of 42

8 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/WF/E /937P. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 91 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ case. So that's okay. 3 have a motion and a cross motion. t's 4 actually Mr. Kraeutler's motion to dismiss the 5 plaintiff's Complaint. And then have a motion by the 6 plaintiff, a cross motion, for summary judgment. 7 Let's just review the facts. 8 Between December 2011 and September 2014, the 9 artist Chun, plaintiff, contracted to exhibit and 10 consign his work to an art gallery in which the 11 defendants Hasted -- is that how you say it? j 12 MR. GERSTEN: Judge, can you possibly keep m/ 13 your voice up. have a bit of a hearing problem in my 14 right ear. 15 THE COURT: Do you want a hearing device? 16 MR. GERSTEN: will stand up. can hear you 17 better this way. 18 Did you have a question for me? 19 THE COURT: How do pronounce your client's 20 name? 21 ' MR. GERSTEN: t's Sarah Hasted. 22 THE COURT: Can you hear me better now? 23 have the microphone on. 24 MR. GERSTEN: can hear you fine now. 25 THE COURT: So defendants Hasted and 6 26 Kraeutler -- am saying your name properly? 3 of Df 3Z 3@ 8 of 42

9 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0 2/TO 1972]2933 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ MR. KRAEUTLER: Yes. 3 THE COURT: -- ran a gallery, which was 4 established in And it closed in The 5 parties had three agreements; one in December 2011, one 6 in June 2012, and another in September of 2014, pursuant 7 to which the defendants would show the work of the 8 artist plaintiff and the plaintiff would receive 9 50 percent of retail price. The defendants would let 10 the plaintiff know when there was a sale within one week 11 of the sale. 12. Anything that was not sold during the period, 13 the display period, would be returned a few months 14.later. 15 n the first agreement, the display period 16 ended in October of And the artwork would go back 17 5 in June 2013 to the artist. 18 The allegations are that Mr. Kraeutler closed 19 the gallery, moved the artwork to storage, and Hasted 20 did not have access. 21 And, again, the allegation is that Kraeutler 22 transferred the proceeds of the gallery to a bank Kraeutler' 23 account in Kraeutler's name. 24 The plaintiff commenced this action for breach 25 of contract, account stated, unjust enrichment, 26 conversion, and replevin. That was February 17, of 34 9 of 42

10 F1LED: NÈW YORK COUNTÈ CLERK / E019019f $P37P 9j' NYSCEF DOC, NO. 91 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ Around July 31, 2015, defendants acknowledged 3 to the plaintiff that they had sold five pieces of 4 artwork, totaling $682, 000. Plaintiff was never 5 informed of the sales and was never compensated. 6 Any disagreements as to the facts as stated? 7 MR. KRAEUTLER: There are some disagreements. 8 At the time closed the gallery, had a falling out 9 with Miss Hasted over mismanagement of money. 10 transferred THE COURT: am going to interrupt you. Not 12 to be rude. e) 13 MR. KRAEUTLER: Yes. 14 THE COURT: But my understanding is that there 15 is another action in which you and MR. GERSTEN: That's been resolved, your 17 Honor. 18 MR. KRAEUTLER: That's been resolved. 19 THE COURT: But the point is that it's not 20 before me. So whatever issues you had amongst the 21 partners of the business are not before me. 22 MR. KRAEUTLER: Okay. 23 THE COURT: t doesn't affect this case 24 between the artist against the gallery. 25 MR. KRAEUTLER: Okay. mê 26 THE COURT: But thank you. 8 Df of 42

11 FLED NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0 5¹72F/ W. 939 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ MR. KRAEUTLER: just wanted to add that the 3 artworks that were remaining at the gallery were moved 4 into storage by me. And they were returned to the 5 artist through Sunny Shin that summer. 6 THE COURT: They were returned to the artist. 7 Okay. 8 MR. ROSENBERG: With all due respect, your 9 Honor, we don't believe that that's a correct statement 10 according to our client. No artworks were returned that 11 were part of this lawsuit. Other artwork that may have 12 been outside the scope of the suit might have been 13 returned, but not these. And your Honor correctly 14 stated that the artwork in question had been sold. That 15 was acknowledged in front of Judge Oing. And the 16 $682,000 that you recited is the correct number. 17 THE COURT: Right. 18 i MR. GERSTEN: Your Honor? 19 THE COURT: Yes, sir. 20 MR. GERSTEN: This is relevant to all this. 21 To my knowledge, none of the artwork involved 22 in this lawsuit was returned. Originally when Judge 23 Oing had the case, there was a claim for replevin. 24 supplied documentation to plaintiffs that the 25 paintings have been sold. And hopefully that issue is 26 resolved. And the only issue we now have is money. Am 8 of of 42

12 [FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05172F/ 2019u NYSCEF DOC. NO. 92 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018 / P 7 2 correct? 3 THE COURT: n this action? 4 MR. GERSTEN: Yes. 5 MR. ROSENBERG: That's only partially correct, 6 your Honor. There are several motions pending before 7 the Court this morning. 8 THE COURT: have a motion to dismiss and a 9 cross motion. 10 MR. ROSENBERG: You also have a motion seeking 11 an attachment, which was filed subsequent to the motion 12 by Mr. Epstein to be relieved of his responsibilities. 13 That motion, you may recall, was last on at the time 14 Mr. Epstein's motion came on. And you adjourned all 15 matters to today.. 16 THE COURT: Okay. 17 MR. GERSTEN: just want to point out two 18 things. The motions having to do with Mr. Epstein and 19 Mr. Kraeutler were not directed to my client, which is 20 why wasn't present the last time you may have seen the 21 parties.. 22 Now, in terms of the money in this case, you 23 mentioned a figure of $680, THE COURT: $682, MR. GERSTEN: Yes. 26 To clarify the issue, my client acknowledges 1D 16 (Kff <xff 33P 3%7 12 of 42

13 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05r/TF/E019019?BB7 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECE VE D NY SCE F: 05/22/2018. P 8 2 that there is a $240,000 contractual debt owed by Hasted 3 Kraeutler LLC to the plaintiff. We dispute every other 4 liability. We'll get to the facts later on. But just you' 5 to address the things that you've already said, just 6 want you to know that we'll concede that Everything else is up for contest. 8 THE COURT: Okay. 9 Yes, sirs. Who is speaking for the plaintiff' plaintiff? 10 MR. ROSENBERG: will be speaking. ' 11 THE COURT: Thank you. Let's start with your 12 motion. 13 MR. ROSENBERG: Let me just back up a little 14 bit to something you said earlier this morning when 15 addressing Mr. Kraeutler. 16 You asked if there were any LLCs, corporations 17 involved here, if he was appearing pro se. The answer 18 is, in our opinion, there are none, notwithstanding what 19 Mr. Gerstein just said. 20 So we dispute the issue of THE COURT: Let me interrupt you. 22 To be clear, was inquiring, as you well know, 23 because Mr. Kraeutler would not be able to represent an 24 LLC. do not see an LLC in your caption. 25 MR. ROSENBERG: That's correct. 26 THE COURT: So unless there has been an S11 cxff of 42

14 F1LED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0572F/201puttgfgu3. p NYSCEF DOC. NO. 92 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ amendment -- 3 MR. ROSENBERG: There has not. 4 THE COURT: We are all on the same page. 5 MR. ROSENBERG: There is no LLC involved here. That' 6 THE COURT: Let's talk about the LLC. That's 7 Mr. Kraeutler's defense -- 8 MR. ROSENBERG: Yes. 9 THE COURT: -- to pretty much everything. 10 MR. ROSENBERG: will be happy to discuss 11 that. 12 But the position that the plaintiff has taken 13 consistently throughout, even when Judge Oing had the 14 matter, there is no LLC. 15 f you parse the language of the agreements to 16 which you cited, you will see that nowhere does the word 17 LLC appear in any way, nor do any of the parties sign 18 those documents in other than an individual capacity. 19 As a matter of fact, the documents themselves refer to 20 themselves in their individual capacities. 21 So we have consistently taken the position 22 there is no LLC defense. Any disputes they have between 23 them is their problem. But as to the LLCs, none exist 24 in this matter. 25 MR. KRAEUTLER: Your Honor, received copies 26 of the agreements from Mr. Chun during the time we were 1% :)% ace cvxx 3% 3' 14 of 42

15 [FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0572E NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ U ]E 10 2 conducting business. did not -- personally signed 3 one on behalf of the LLC, and one was produced later 4 with a fraudulent signature of mine on it. 5 MR. GERSTEN: 'd -- 6 MR. ROSENBERG: With all due respect, your 7 Honor, at the time that Mr. Kraeutler was represented by 8 Davis and Gilbert, there was never a representation as 9 to the authenticity of any signatures on the agreement. 10 As a matter of fact, they, the Kraeutler side 11 of this equation, never put in an Answer, but rather 12 opted to move pre Answer for the motion to dismiss. 13 MR. GERSTEN: Your Honor? 14 THE COURT: Yes. 15 MR. GERSTEN: will confirm that this is the ' 16 first that 've heard about this. Unfortunately, due to 17 the prior litigation between Mr. Kraeutler, there has 18 been no joint communication anywhere in this case. 19 will confirm that's the first 've heard of it. 20 However, want to address the LLC question. 21 Now, Mr. Rosenberg is correct in the sense that 22 Mr. Kraeutler and Miss Hasted signed in their 23 individual-- signed just their own names. 24 However, you have to consider, first of all, 25 the fact that these are not -- none of the people here 26 were lawyers. They don't always follow the legal 18 of 34' 3Q 15 of 42

16 FXZZD: NZW CWORK CO~VV C~Z O NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ necessities.. 3 However, there is no question, and we have 4 documentation that there is an LLC that was formed, had 5 an operating agreement. The top of our contracts here 6 did not say LLC but did say Hasted Kraeutler. And it's 7 our position that our clients were always doing business 8 in an LLC capacity. 9 Now, obviously if had been their attorney 10 many, many months ago, would have warned them or any 11 other client to protect yourself, make sure you sign as 12 a member of the LLC and not your individual names..) 13 But if you really want to look at the proof of 14 the pudding, if there is ambiguity here, parole evidence 15 would be admissible to explain how the parties actually 16 did business. 17 And what happened is there have been a number 18 of previous transactions where the gallery represented 19 Mr. Chun. And on all of those cases where payments were 20 made, that was always made from the LLC. And Mr. Chun 21 consistently accepted checks from -- that were made out 22 from the LLC. 23 The gallery itself, the address of the gallery, 24 took all the delivery of the paintings. The paintings 25 were listed in the Hasted Kraeutler gallery catalog. 26 Everything was done. f you look at the real nitty 1X at of 42

17 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTi CLERK 051/TF/E019019(W. P NYSCEF DOC, N0, 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ j Proceedings 2 gritty of the transaction, until this deal -- 3 THE COURT: Other than the checks payable to 4 the artist, am not hearing anything else with an LLC 5 on it. 6 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. There is nothing -- 7 THE COURT: Nothing other than the checks. 8 MR. GERSTEN: Other than the checks. But the 9 checks, maintain, are vitally important to show what 10 happened here. 11 THE COURT: Well, as to the argument, did you 12 want to say something? 13 MR. ROSENBERG: did, your Honor. 14 THE COURT: There is nothing in the agreements 15 about an LLC. To be quite honest, have a lot of art 16 cases. Everyone seems to know, see a lot of 17, signatures, you know, John Smith for this corporation, 18 that LLC. 19 MR. ROSENBERG: Your Honor's observation is 20 exactly correct. The argument that Mr. Gerstein 21 presents now is, gee, had this LLC, but kind of 22 forgot what 'm supposed to do, so it's really your 23 problem, Mr. Chun. 24 THE COURT: Mr. Gerstein is not saying that ' 25 they forgot. He's saying they are not lawyers and they 26 don't know. And we all know, that is not really a 1Z of Df 34' 3T 17 of 42

18 FLED: FrLZD: NEW NZw YORK vork COMTY CO~TV CLERK 0 1. E NYSCE F DOC. NO. 93. RECE VED NYSCEF: 05//22// defense. 3 MR. ROSENBERG: t sounded like he was 4 testifying and making himself as a fact witness as to 5 what all came months ago that may not be related to this 6 case, may be related to this case. 7 THE COURT: Okay. 8 MR. GERSTEN: This, by the way, is in 9 affidavits. am not a fact witness. 10 MR. ROSENBERG: With respect to the affidavits 11 that Mr. Gerstein references, he did not E file his i 12 motion papers. 13 MR. GERSTEN: Yes, did. Late, but it was 14 filed. 15 THE COURT: On that issue, do not appreciate 16 the arguing back and forth about Mr. Gerstein, the way 17 he practices, and so forth. 'm not getting in the 18 middle of that. We are here today for a very serious 19 reason. And that reason is the motion to dismiss and a 20 summary judgment motion. 21 MR. ROSENBERG: will confine myself to that. 22 THE COURT: don't want to hear another word 23 on that. 24 Just on that issue, out of curiosity, where is 25 your memo of law? 26 MR. ROSENBERG: The memo of law, apologize ef Df 34' 3'7 18 of 42

19 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLËÏ 0 EF/E01P19?BB'P NYSCEF DOC, NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ for not standing, the memo of law that referenced as 3 to part of the most recent arguments was before Judge 4 Oing when we moved for an order of seizure. reference 5 it in my papers. 6 MR. GERSTEN: will confirm that. 7 THE COURT: Where is your memo of law for my 8 motion? 9 MR. ROSENBERG: With your motion, your Honor, 10 my apologies, That was included in my affirmations. 11 The cites were not included in the memorandum of law. 12 MR. GERSTEN: Your Honor THE COURT: We can't really throw stones at 14 other people when we don't ourselves comply with the 15 rules. 16 MR. ROSENBERG: 1 will take the mea culpa, your 17 Honor. 18 MR. GERSTEN: Your Honor, we did get memos of 19 law. 20 THE COURT: didn't. 21 MR. GERSTEN: One thing want to point out, 22 if there is a summary judgment motion, there is supposed 23 to be an affidavit THE COURT: Mr. Gerstein, am going to 25 interrupt. Don't keep talking over me. t's not nice. 26 MR. ' GERSTEN: 'm sorry. 14 jj.4 of ef 3V of 42

20 [FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05r/TF/E01901RBB P NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05//21// THE COURT: am not even considering a 3 summary judgment motion. Ninety percent of the we' 4 Complaint is on information and belief. So no, re 5 not going there. 6 MR. ROSENBERG: But, your Honor, if might 7 address that one small issue. And think do in my 8 papers. 9 CPLR 105(u) says that a verified pleading can 10 stand as an affidavit of merit. 11 THE COURT: Your own client MR. ROSENBERG: Signed it. 13 THE COURT: On information and belief. He 14 says on information and belief for everything. He 15 doesn't seem to know anything about his case. Look at 16 the Complaint. Everywhere that highlighted pink, 17 ' mean, the whole Complaint is pink. t's just not 18 appropriate. Everything important is upon information doesn' 19 and belief. He doesn't seem to know anything. 20 MR. ROSENBERG: Well, as to the items that 21 might be applicable here, your Honor, when we talk about 22 the agreements, which are referenced as exhibits to the 23 pleading, and then he does say upon information and 24 belief as to the amount of the sale because he did not 25 at that time know what the price was, the paintings 26 either did or did not get sold. So that would e>f' j..s of 42

21 FrLZD: mzw CWORK CO vv CLZRK 0 0 MSCEF DOC. N0. 91 RECEVED MSCEF: 05/21/ necessarily be upon information and belief. 3 But as to the facts that the paintings were 4 consigned and were not returned, think his 5 verification stands under 105(u).. 6 THE COURT: You can't ' get summary judgment 7 when the most important parts of your Complaint are on 8 information and belief. t's just inappropriate. 9 You can certainly do discovery and come back 10 with an appropriate summary judgment motion with 11 appropriate facts, documents, whatever you have. But 12 you have nothing. You have nothing. m) 13 MR. ROSENBERG: Well THE COURT: Even if you were to win on 15 liability, you can't get damages because it's all on 16 information and belief. 17 MR. ROSENBERG: As to the issue of liability, 18 would like the Court to note my objection. 19 THE COURT: Yes. 20 MR. ROSENBERG: 1 understand your comment, your 21 Honor. 22 THE COURT: don't think you are there yet. 23 t's not to say that you aren't at some point, but 24 certainly not on this Complaint.. 25 MR. ROSENBERG: Judge, if 1 may come back to 26 that one more time.. MLS uf of 42

22 FLED: NEW ram COUNTY CLERK / f. B27P HYSCEP' llwscef DOC.. N RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/2a/ f you accept my argument under 105(u), and you 3 take the admissions against the defendants' own interest 4 in that the paintings were sold and $682,000 was 5 garnered, do we not then have the same position that 6 would be in, at least to the issue of liability? 7 MR. GERSTEN: Your Honor. 8 THE COURT: Yes.. ' 9 MR. GERSTEN: As 've said before, one of the 10 paintings in their Complaint was actually sold. We do 11 concede, and will waive any defect in the papers, we 12 will concede that there is a contractual obligation of 13 $240, 000, which would be the paintings that Mr. Chun 14 wasn't paid for, plus the commission. 15 So if you adopt our position ultimately in the 16 case, what we are conceding is that the LLC, which was 17 never made a party incidentally, as a matter of fact, ~ 18 pointed that out in our Answer, but if they want to make 19 the LLC a party, and take the $240, 000 judgment against 20 the LLC, have no quarrel with that. t's the rest of 21 the case that's the problem. And on that we are going 22 to stand on whatever rights we have. 23 One small other issue, in the cross motion, 24 asked for permission, in the event that this matter has 25 not settled, we are talking about settlement right now, 26 to have the right to have a cross claim against 327) (a) ot f of 42

23 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0 593Pi5/EB1981i9f P NYSCKF' ascar ace.. so- 93 ascarveo ases: es at acts 18 2 Mr. Kraeutler for any potential liability above 3 50 percent if there is a personal judgment against my 4 client. 5 n other words, the sole purpose of the cross 6 claim would be that in the worst case scenario, if you 7 issue a judgment against Mr. Kraeutler and Miss Hasted 8 personally, that my client have the right, if push comes 9 to shove, to recover a 50 percent share -- if she has to.10 pay any more than 50 percent, she wants to recover that 11 from Mr. Kraeutler, j 12 THE COURT: Let me just straighten things out 13 so we are on the same page. 14 am here today for a motion to dismiss and a 15 motion for summary judgment. don't have -- see it 16 in your papers, that actually got from the plaintiffs, 17 didn't get papers from you directly, Mr. Gerstein. 18 MR. GERSTEN: You didn't get that? 19 THE COURT: Mr. Pierro sent me your papers. 20 MR. GERSTEN: My service told me this was all 21 electronically filed. f you are missing that THE COURT: Right. But am not an E filed 23 part. am a paper part. E. 24 MR. GERSTEN: will have to move on that, if 25 need be. 26 THE COURT: don't have a motion from you, a 34' %EL 28. csk. <@it of 42

24 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0 972f/ 01909W:63/ NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018. E 19 2 cross motion from you. 3 MR. GERSTEN: You do not have it at all? 4 THE COURT: No. 5 MR. GERSTEN: Well, the only thing would say 6 is that even in the absence of the cross motion, under 7 CPLR 3212, you would have the power, if you thought it 8 appropriate, once the plaintiff makes the motion for 9 summary judgment, if you thought it was warranted, you 10 would have the power to grant j THE COURT: Reverse summary judgment. But we 12 are so not there. 13 MR. GERSTEN: understand. 14 THE COURT: You all need to do a little more 15 discovery. 16 MR. GERSTEN: Then what ask to do at this 17 point is deny any relief, except if they want to make 18 the LLC a party and take the $240,000 judgment. 19 THE COURT: f you want to settle that way, 20 you can take it outside and talk about settlement. 21 MR. GERSTEN: Okay. Sure. 22 THE COURT: But am not participating in your 23 settlement negotiations. And the reason 'm not going 24 to is, as we all know, if this is a bench trial, am 25 the factfinder.. am never going to participate in a 26 settlement if 'm going to be the factfinder or there is 29 J9 of of 42

25 FLED: FXLZD: YORK VO COUNTY COvmvv CLERK CLz~ 9 1. Pp NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECE VE D NYSCEF: 05/22/ Proceedings 2 any chance that will be the factfinder. 3 MR. GERSTEN: Understood. 4 THE COURT: So stop now. f you want to go 5 outside and talk settlement, go ahead. f you want me 6 to send you to Judge Roth or Judge Schlesinger for a 7 settlement conference, let me know. f you want me to 8 send you to the commercial division ADR program, let me 9 know. But please stop bringing up all of your ideas for 10 settlement. 11 MR. GERSTEN: Absolutely. 12 THE COURT: am not going to hear them. am m. 13 not going to do it. 14 Yes, sir? 15 MR. ROSENBERG: But as to Mr. Gerstein's kind 16 offer of concession, your Honor, does it not come back 17 to the question, the paintings having been sold, 18 $682,000 have been garnered, and the plaintiff has not 19 been paid or. received back his artwork, so come back 20 to the issue of summary judgment, has he not conceded at liability' 21 least liability? 22 THE COURT: As to 240? He said that from the 23 beginning, as to the $240, MR. ROSENBERG: With all due respect to 25 Mr. Gerstein, 'm not addressing the $240,000 number. 26 'm addressing the concession that money was garnered of ef 30 3@ 25 of 42

26 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05P2F/E NYSCEF DOC.. NO. 93ì RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018 BB7 P 21 2 Paintings were sold. Plaintiff did not get either money 3 or paintings. That at least is the issue of summary 4 judgment on liability. f we have to have a trial on 5 damages, we can do that. 6 THE COURT: Hold on to that thought for one 7 second. 8 Mr. Kraeutler, you dispute that any paintings 9 were sold, correct? 10 MR. KRAEUTLER: Not at all. 'm not disputing 11 that at all, your Honor. S 12 THE COURT: So you admit also that paintings 13 were sold and plaintiff was not paid? 14 MR. KRAEUTLER: Yes, on behalf of the LLC, of 15 course. 16 THE COURT: Well, as said earlier, to be 17 clear, none of your documents mention the LLC. So 18 have rejected that argument that your attorneys made. 19 You may have an LLC. And all the money may be in the 20 Chase account under the LLC's name. But all of your 21 agreements do not mention the LLC. 22 And there is no reason to go beyond the 23 agreements, as Mr. Gerstein suggested, because it's 24 quite clear that they are not there. don't have a 25 reason to go beyond the agreements themselves. 26 MR. KRAEUTLER: Okay of c)f 3Z 34' 26 of 42

27 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK Ed1961 Jf. 58 7! P MYSCEP' ascar age. no. 93 ascense ascar: osfaafacas 22 2 THE COURT: So that argument is rejected. 3 MR. KRAEUTLER: Okay. 4 THE COURT: Everybody is standing. Why don't 5 you all sit down. 6 MR. ROSENBERG: Sorry. Only because had 7 one-- 8 THE COURT: You might be right about the 9 breach of contract. 10 MR. ROSENBERG: believe that am. 11 THE COURT: And it's actually not your 12 client's Verified Complaint on information and belief. m/ 13 t's because of what defendants are saying that you can 14 get summary judgment. Because your Complaint MR. ROSENBERG: Notwithstanding my 16 deficiencies, your Honor, and you are right, agree, 17 that it's what the defendants are saying and have said, they' 18 and they said it in front of Judge Oing, and re 19 saying it now in front of you. At least to the issue of ' 20 liability, don't think there's a question here. 21 THE COURT: So the issue is narrowed down to 22 the damages. ' 23 Let's go through your Complaint. You also have 24 unjust enrichment. 25 Mr. Gerstein. 26 MR. GERSTEN: just want to make it very 23 2Z~ nf aft 34' of 42

28 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTŸ CLERK 05W/E01901 R*J877 NfSCEF' SYSCEF $6C. Ki@C. mg. lo. 93. ~x~zvzd le!scsw: Mes~-, t3//re//ro//1 5//M//P j.. P 23 2 clear, conceded liability on the part of the LLC, not 3 individual liability. 4 THE COURT: Well, as said, earlier today you 5 made your argument about parole evidence. rejected 6 it. had to clarify -- 7 MR. GERSTEN: can -- 8 THE COURT: We can keep talking over each 9 other. You know well that the court reporter is you' 10 recording what 'm saying and not what re saying. 11 Right? l 12 MR. GERSTEN: Understood. 13 THE COURT: To be clear, that argument is 14 rejected. There is nothing in the agreements about the 15 LLCs. 16 Where does that leave us if the concession is 17 on behalf of the LLC and not on behalf of the 18 individuals? 19 MR. ROSENBERG: think it leaves us exactly 20 where we' re supposed to be, your Honor. That the 21 paintings were sold -- let me back up a little bit. You' 22 You've already rejected the LLC argument. So 23 what that leaves us with is a claim against two 24 individuals.. 25 The documentation that was presented by the 26 defendants during the order to seizure arguments and the 34' 25 2.k mfa z>f of 42

29 FÏLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK ?B81 1WSCEF DDC RECEVED 24 2 replevin cause of action said, in fact, what 1 repeated 3 before, the paintings were sold, the money was garnered. 4 So here we are now. n my humble opinion, 5 we' re entitled to at least summary judgment on the issue 6 of liability and a trial on the issue of damages. 7 Yet, the paper that you have before you, at 8 least to the extent, if you accept your argument that 9 there is no LLC, then they have conceded at least 10 $682, THE COURT: Not that there is no LLC. Just 12 that the agreements, the breach of contract is between the individuals, not with the LLC. 14 MR. ROSENBERG: Correct. 15 THE COURT: Because of the way the contract 16 was drafted. 17 MR. ROSENBERG: Correct. That's been our 18 position from the beginning of this lawsuit to today. 19 THE COURT: But you can't get summary judgment 20 on your breach of contract against the individuals. 21 Your Complaint is insufficient to get the summary 22 judgment. You need the defendants' defendants concession to get 23 the summary judgment. But their concession is on behalf 24 of the LLC. 25 MR. ROSENBERG: What about the conversion, your U 26 Honor, what a bou't the argument s on convers 3 on? 24 nt 34' 29 of 42

30 [FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 0595ML*/eB19019t93. wrseer ace. no. 93 ascease arsew: osf aa faels 7 P 25 We' 2 THE COURT: re just on the breach of 3 contract right now, because the breach of contract -- 4 can only do one thing at a time. The breach of contract is over this agreement that's between the individuals. 6 And that's the finding 'm making based on the 7 documentary evidence. 8 MR. ROSENBERG: accept that. 9 THE COURT: Good. 10 MR. ROSENBERG: accept that. 11 THE COURT: Okay. l 12 MR. ROSENBERG: But that's only part of the 6 13 story. 14 THE COURT: Well, you are trying to get 15 summary judgment on liability. And 'm not sure you 16 have it if their concession is only on -- what else in 17 the record do you have that shows that they acknowledge 18 the sales? 19 MR. ROSENBERG: Mr. Gerstein presented payments 20 that went to Chase. Even that set of documents that he 21 presented did not identify an LLC. Am to assume THE COURT: Actually, the bank statements are 23 in the name of the LLC. 24 MR. ROSENBERG: My recollection and yours are 25 different, your Honor. don't think the Chase account 26 was identified as the LLC. 34' 2$ 25 mfa ak 30 of 42

31 LED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/TF/E019uitg(5r3/p NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ THE COURT: t's at the very top of the 3 document. t's hard to see actually, unless you remove 4 all the clips, which, of course, did. 5 MR. KRAEUTLER: Your Honor., at no time were 6 there any personal bank accounts involved. 7 THE COURT: Thank you. 8 MR. ROSENBERG: Let's break this down as you 9 and are accustomed to doing. 10 think that the breach of the agreements as 11 between our client, Mr. Chun, and these two individuals 12 is based upon the language of those agreements they were 13 to sell or return the property. And if they sold, they 14 were supposed to turn over money. 15 So far don't hear anything in the record or 16 today's argument that disputes that. They did exactly 17 the opposite. They sold the paintings, or those that Chun,' 18 were unsold did not go back to Mr. Chun, and the money 19 that was garnered did not go to Mr. Chun. And, 20 therefore, see breach and see conversion. 21 THE COURT: So we can move on to conversion. 22 Let's talk about the account stated. Again, 23 it's the LLC agreement -- the LLC is the defense. And 24 that seems to be the only defense. That motion is 25 denied. The breach of contract. Unjust enrichment is 26 going to be -- well, you have a breach of contract, so 28 of of 42

32 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05720/2019ugggg/p. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ you are not going to get unjust enrichment. 3 MR. ROSENBERG: t would have been in the 4 alternative then, Judge.! 5 THE COURT: So that's granted.! 6 So that leaves us with replevin and conversion. 7 MR. ROSENBERG: The replevin issue was 8 addressed by Judge Oing. And once proof was shown that 9 the paintings were, in fact, sold, it rendered it moot. 10 That no longer is a viable cause of action. 11 THE COURT: All of them? l 12 MR. ROSENBERG: All were sold that were in 13 controversy, yes, your Honor. 14 MR. GERSTEN: That's correct. 15 THE COURT: Thanks. that' 16 So that leaves us with conversion. And that's 17 against both individuals. 18 Mr. Gerstein, what do you have to say about 19 conversion? 20 MR. GERSTEN: Essentially, our position, case 21 law in general, is that if the gravamen of the case is 22 in contract, any other cause of action is superfluous. 23 know there is clearly case law as to unjust 24 enrichment. And believe the law would be the same as 25 to conversion. The case here THE COURT: Can you hold on of 3Q 3'0 32 of 42

33 FXLZD: mew vo Ca~vs C~ERK 05 P NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ Proceedings 2 f replevin is moot, then why isn't conversion? 3 You can't have a conversion claim for cash. 4 MR. ROSENBERG: Sure. You can convert the 5 proceeds of the sale, the money that was garnered from 6 the sale. The withholding of that property, which would 7 have been rightfully Mr. Chun's, has been withheld and 8 thereby converted. 9 f this had been in some other courthouse, this 10 might have had a different appellation than conversion. 11 We're talking about a substantial sum of money. You you' 12 can't simply say have it, but re not getting it. 13 The contract said he is entitled to it. 14 THE COURT: At the end of the day it is a 15 breach of contract. don't think you can have a 16 conversion claim for the cash now that you all concede 17 that the paintings are gone. 18 MR. ROSENBERG: may hold a different you' 19 position, your Honor, but if re suggesting it's 20 subsumed in the breach of contract can' THE COURT: Not subsumed. t's just you can't 22 have conversion for cash. 23 MR. ROSENBERG: Well, think -- we were 24 entitled to like or kind. And if it then gets converted we' 25 to money, think re entitled to say that the 26 withholding of that property, which is, in essence, the 2 of of 42

34 FLED: NEW YORK C ÛÑEE CLÈ1 0 51/99/ ?B8 P 5YSCEP' 93' NYSCEF DOC, NO. 91 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/2018 we' 2 proceeds of the artwork, re entitled to say 3 conversion. 4 But, your Honor, if we get to the issue of 5 liability, suppose 'm not concerned how get there. 6 THE COURT: Right. Okay. 7 MR. GERSTEN: We're just maintaining our 8 position that it's a contract and nothing more. 9 THE COURT: Right. Okay. 10 The only issue is what else have in this 11 record that supports the breach. The Complaint is 12 insufficient. 13 MR. ROSENBERG: f may, your Honor, while you 14 peruse the papers. 15 THE COURT: Yes. 16 MR. ROSENBERG: Just to reiterate, that the 17 acknowledgements before Judge Oing, that if the 18 paintings were governed by an agreement between or among 19 individuals, then the acknowledgment and admission 20 against interest that those paintings were sold, and 21 that money was generated thereby, should warrant enough 22 for the Court to find at least to the extent the breach 23 of. contract.. 24 THE COURT: n support of your motion you have 25 a document from Miss Hasted where she admits that she * 26 sold the five works. 29 ef 34' 34 of 42

35 FXLZD: mzw VO CO~TV CLZnK G5 P NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF:.05/22/ MR. ROSENBERG: That's ' correct, your Honor. 3 THE COURT: The motion for summary judgment is 4 going to be granted on the issue of liability under the 5 contract, leaving us with the issue of damages. 6 Otherwise, the motion for summary judgment is denied. 7 The motion to dismiss, just to be clear, is denied as to 8 breach of contract, denied as to account stated, granted 9 as to unjust enrichment, granted as to conversion. And 10 the parties agree that the replevin is moot. 11 am going to direct the plaintiff to get the 12 transcript, to be so ordered. m) 13 MR. GERSTEN: didn't hear what you just 14 said, your Honor. 15 THE COURT: You will see it in the transcript 16 that the motion for summary judgment on liability is 17 granted. 18 MR. GERSTEN: understand. 19 To the extent that we did not concede, of 20 course, we want to have a written order because it has ' 21 to be a finding against the individuals. 'll have to 22 discuss with my client THE COURT: Sorry, you didn't hear me direct 24 plaintiff's counsel to get the transcript, which will be 25 so ordered. ' 26 MR. GERSTEN: That's fine. 38 of of 42

36 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05yW/201tP 19?B87P. NVSCEF' NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ THE COURT: Which explains the Court's 3 reasoning. 4 MR. GERSTEN: understand. 5 THE COURT: Anything else that we can talk Discovery' 6 about? Discovery? 7 MR. ROSENBERG: would like to address one 8 other item, your Honor. made reference to it earlier. 9 THE COURT: The attachment motion? 10 MR. ROSENBERG: Yes. 11 THE COURT: don't have that. 12 MR. ROSENBERG: That, likewise, was submitted 13 to the Court and E filed shortly after Mr. Epstein made 14 his motion to be relieved. 15 THE COURT: Let me take five minutes and go look for that. 17 MR. ROSENBERG: Thank you, Judge. 18 (Whereupon, a recess was taken.) 19. THE COURT: We don't have those papers filed. 20 They are not in the E filing. 21 MR. ROSENBERG: They were E filed by United 22 Lawyers Service, your Honor,. 23 THE COURT: No. 24 MR. ROSENBERG: don't wish to confuse the We' 25 issue here. We've accomplished much this morning. 26 What will do is will refile a separate 34 of Df 3Z 3P 36 of 42

37 FLED : NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK F/ 2015) 19t. 93 P NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ motion -- 3 THE COURT: Right. 4 MR. ROSENBERG: -- seeking the relief now that 5 have more facts that will support the request for the 6 attachment relief in any event. 7 THE COURT: Okay. 8 COURT CLERK: see a cross motion. 9 THE COURT: That's a cross motion for summary 10 judgment. 11 MR. ROSENBERG: As a matter of fact, 12 Mr. Epstein put in opposition to my motion, your Honor. 13 t was discussed at the last court appearance. 14 THE COURT: Did you put in two cross motions? 15 MR. ROSENBERG: No. 'm sorry. There were two 16 cross motions. One was the motion to dismiss. The 17 second cross motion was made after Mr. Epstein moved to. 18 be relieved. 19 THE COURT: There was a cross motion to a 20 motion to be relieved? 21 MR. ROSENBERG: Yes -- no. joined his motion 22 to the extent that had no opposition to him being 23 relieved. And asked for additional relief. 24 The papers were, in fact, ed. But will 25 make a separate motion. 26 THE COURT: t doesn't work that way.. That 32 of of 42

38 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 057P2/T01 T2:85. rseer age. no. 913 asesase wrscar: as ar 201s 33 2 was just about relieving counsel. t needs to be about 3 relieving counsel. And you certainly can't make a 4 motion like that when Mr. Kraeutler's ' attorney is 5 leaving.. 6 MR. ROSENBERG: But he did appear. Mr. Epstein 7 appeared on my motion. 8 THE COURT: Okay. 9 MR. ROSENBERG: will make it again. 10 THE COURT: don't have it. 11 MR. ROSENBERG: t's not a problem, Judge. f 12 THE COURT: Do you want to do a discovery depositions' 13 stipulation right now, depositions? 14 MR. GERSTEN: am going to be talking to my 15 client and to Mr. Kraeutler. We may want to try to work 16 some numbers We' out ourselves. We'll do the best we can 17 within the limits of my client's finances. 18 THE COURT: Do you want to be referred, before 19 you start doing discovery, which can be expensive, to 20 Judge Schlesinger or Judge Roth? 21 MR. ROSENBERG: For purposes of a settlement Honor' 22 conference, your Honor? 23 THE COURT: Yes. 24 MR. ROSENBERG: Yes. 25 MR. GERSTEN: t can't hurt. 26 THE COURT: Let me check on their 38 mfa aft 3'4 38 of 42

39 YORK VO~ Co~Tv CLz~ Q5 P FLED: FrLZD: NEW MZX COUNTY CLERK 1. P NYSCEF DOC. NO. 93 RECEVED NYSCEF: 05/22/ availability, who is available sooner. 1 will do an 3 order later today that will give you a date to appear 4 before one of them. These are retired judges. And they 5 help us settle cases so that you won't incur the expense 6 of discovery, depositions, document exchanges, those 7 sorts of things. 8 So we'll put in that order also a date for a 9 discovery conference, so that if you don't settle by a you' 10 certain date, then you'll come back here for a 11 conference. 12 MR. GERSTEN: Understood. we' 13 THE COURT: So re done. 14 MR. ROSENBERG: Thank you, your Honor. 15! THE COURT: Thank you.. 16 MR. GERSTEN: Thank you, your Honor. 17 MR. KRAEUTLER: Thank you * * * * 20 Cert' 21 Cert fied to be a true and accurate transcript t aphic minutes taken within. ~<~a, 24 Dia e Kavana gh, RPR Senior Courk Reporter of of 42

40 FLED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 06/21/ :42 AM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 109 RECEVED NYSCEF: 06/21/2018 $UPRBluB COUNTY nda lk COURT OFTHE NBW YORK OE STATE OF NEW YQRK 50405/2017 KWANOTOUNG CHUN Pláktiff, $ÁRAH andimduallÿ NDEX NO /2017 HÃS Ad ÑFim Q KRÂEU EP ER d/b&hastederaeutl t fewants i & CiRON AVDOFRHDTCHER 60$ TNRD NENUB, 34TH éw tòis NBEYòFX, (412) of 42 FLOOR LLP

41 "~-"~ ~,; '-";.,''~".,":-; NYSCEF - New York County Supreme Court '~M:.,',,,«~>j Confirmation Notice ' ~ or 8k//~. K~'j i This is an automated response for Supreme Court cases. The NYSCEF site has received your electronically filed documents for the following case /2017 Kwang Young Chun - v. - Sarah Hasted et al Assigned Judge: Andrea Masley Documents Received on 06/21/ :42 AM Doc # Document Type Motion # 109 NOTCE OF APPEAL (AMENDED) Does not contain an SSN or CP as defined in 202.5(e) or 206.5(e) 110 PRE-ARGUMENT STATEMENT Does not contain an SSN or CP as defined in 202.5(e) or 206.5(e) Filing V User Name: Joshua S Krakowsky Phone #: Address: jsk@dmlegal.com Fax #: Work Address: 605 Third Avenue New York, NY Notifications An notification regarding this filing has been sent to the following address(es) on 06/21/ :42 AM: EPSTEN, JOSHUA H. - jepstein@dglaw.com GERSTEN, RALPH M. - rgerstein@comcast.net KRAKOWSKY, JOSHUA S -isk@dmlegal.com PENA, MELSSA A - mapena@nmmlaw.com PERRO JR, ROGER - roger@pierro-law.com ROSENBERG, MCHAEL A - rosenbergesq@aol.com Hon. Milton A. Tingling, New York County Clerk and Clerk of the Supreme Court Phone: Website: operations.shtml NYSCEF Resource Center - EFile@nycourts.gov Phone: (646) Fax: (212) Website: Page Pago i1 of 2 41 of 42

42 ,i",;:-"'-',~"-~> NYSCEF - New York County Supreme Court ~,, 'W~j Confirmation Notice p /2017 Kwang Young Chun - v. - Sarah Hasted et at Assigned Judge: Andrea Masley NOTE: f submitting a working copy of this filing to the court, you must include as a notification page firmly affixed thereto a copy of this Confirmation Notice. Hon. Milton A. Tingling, New York County Clerk and Clerk of the Supreme Court Phone: Website: NYSCEF Resource Center - EFile@nycourts.gov Phone: (646) Fax: (212) Website: Pago 2 of 2 42 of 42