FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/08/ :46 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 209 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/08/2016

Transcription

1 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/08/ :46 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 209 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/08/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK SAMUEL PFEIFFER, - against - Plaintiff, MID-TOWN DEVELOPMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, MIDTOWN DEVELOPMENT, L.P., and TISHMAN SEYPER, Defendants. Assigned to Justice Ramos Commercial Division Part 53M NOTICE OF ENTRY PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that attached are true copies of orders in the abovecaptioned case that were entered in the Office of the New York County Clerk on March 3, Dated: New York, New York March 8, 2016 FRIED, FRANK, HARRIS, SHRIVER & JACOBSON LLP By: s/ Janice Mac Avoy Janice Mac Avoy Sujata Jhaveri One New York Plaza New York, NY (212) Attorneys for Defendant Tishman Speyer Worldwide, L.L.C., sued herein as Tishman Seyper 1 of 11

2 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK NYSCEF DOC. NO. 206 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/03/2016 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK - NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: RAMOS Justice PART 53 PFEIFFER INDEX NO /15 MID-TOWN DEV., et al - V - MOTION DATE ' MOTION SEQ. NO. 01 MOTION CAL. NO. The following papers, numbered 1 to were read on this motion to/for Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause - Affidavits - Exhibits Answering Affidavits - Exhibits Replying Affidavits Upon the foregoing papers, It is ordered that this motion Is GRANTED in its entirety, for the reasons set forth in this Court's 2/25/2016 transcript. Order signed. DATED: CHARLES E. RAMO5 4.s.c. 1. CHECK ONE 2. CHECK AS APPROPRIATE : 3. CHECK IF APPROPRIATE : 0 DO NOT POST CASE DISPOSED 0 NON-FINAL DISPOSITION MOTION IS: 0 GRANTED 0 DENIED GRANTED IN PART DOPIER 0 SETTLE ORDER El SUBMIT ORDER 0 FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT 0 REFERENCE 2 of 11

3 At Commercial Division Part 53 of Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of New York, at the Courthouse thereof; located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York on the voiday of Feloacy, 2016 PRESENT: HONORABLE CHARLES E. RAMOS Justice. SAMUEL PFEIFFER, - against - Plaintiff, MID-TOWN DEVELOPMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, MIDTOWN DEVELOPMENT, L.P., and TISHMAN SEYPER, Defendants. Motion Seq. Nos. 1 and 2 ORDER Defendants Mid-town Development Limited Partnership (also sued herein as Midtown Development, L.P.) (collectively, "Midtown") and Tishman Speyer Worldwide, L.L.C. (incorrectly sued here as Tishman Seyper) ("Tishman Speyer") having made motions to dismiss the Verified Amended Complaint, cancel the notices of pendency, award sanctions and for a broader litigation injunction (Motion Seq. Nos. 1 and 2) (NYSCEF Doc. Nos ) ("Motions"), and Plaintiff having cross-moved to reinstate or vacate previous actions or amend the Verified Amended Complaint (NYSCEF Doc. No. 197), and the Motions and cross-motion having come on to be heard and considered by the Court, 3 of 11

4 Samuel Pfeiffer v, Mid-town Development Limited Partnership, Page 2 of 4 NOW, upon the reading and filing of the Notice of Motion by Midtown dated September 30, 2015 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 96), the Affirmation of Jeffrey Shore with accompanying exhibits dated September 30, 2015 ((NYSCEF Doc. Nos ), the Notice of Motion by Tishman Speyer dated September 30, 2015 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 124), and the Affirmation of Janice Mac Avoy dated September 30, 2015 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 125), all in support of the motions td dismiss, and the Plaintiff's Affidavit and Memorandum of Law dated February 24, 2016 in opposition to the Defendants' Motions and in support of Plaintiff's cross-motion (NYSCEF Doc. No. 197), and the Motions and cross-motion having come on to be heard on February 25, 2016, and the Court having heard the arguments of the parties, and due deliberation having been had, Now, upon motion of,fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, counsel for Defendant Tishman Speyer, it is hereby: ORDERED that the Motions (Motion Seq. Nos. 1 and 2) are granted and the crossmotion is denied and the Plaintiff's amended complaint be and the same is dismissed with prejudice and, it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court is hereby directed to enter judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint with prejudice, and it is further ORDERED that the notices of pendency (copies of which are attached hereto as Appendices A and B) that originally were filed in the office of the New York County Clerk on July 21, 2015 under Kings County Supreme Court Index No /15, because this action originally was filed in Kings County Supreme Court, before this action was transferred to this Court pursuant to July 21, 2015 order of Justice Carolyn Demarest, (NYSCEF Doc. No. 70) 4 of 11

5 Samuel Pfeiffer v, Mid-town Development Limited Partnership, Page 3 of 4 and opened and maintained under New York County Index /2015, and involving Block 708, Lot No. 1 and Block 709 Lot No. 17, be and the same areltereby cancelled, and, it is further ORDERED that the New York County Clerk cancel forthwith both notices of pendency upon issuance of this Order, and it is further co 0 At s ORDERED that pursuant to 22 NYCRR (b), within teave16)days of service of a copy of this Order with notice of its entry, Plaintiff is directed to pay $10, as sanctions, to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection, which is warranted by Plaintiff's frivolous litigation and, it is further ORDERED that Samuel Pfeiffer, Chana Pfeiffer, every other Pfeiffer family member not named herein, Jericho Group, Ltd., Jericho Co., and their officers, directors, shareholders, principals, managers, affiliates, agents, attorneys and assigns, whether in their own right or as assignee, transferee or purchaser, and any other person or entity who may purport to hold an interest in the June 18, 2002 contract between Jericho Group, Ltd. and Midtown that is the subject of this action (the "2002 Contract"), be and hereby are enjoined from (A) filing notices of pendency against the property located at Block 708, Lot No. 1 and Block 709, Lot No. 17 (the "Property"), or any portion thereof, or (B) seeking to reopen this action or any prior action or commencing any action or special proceeding seeking legal or equitable relief from (1) Defendants Midtown and/or Tishman Speyer, their direct or indirect parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, partners, members, managers, shareholders, principals, trustees, beneficiaries, attorneys, representatives, agents, or employees, or (2) any other purchasers or contract vendees of the Property, or (3) any lender to any such purchaser or contract vendee, or 3 5 of 11

6 Samuel Pfeiffer v. Mid-town Development Limited Partnership, Page 4 of 4 (4) Robert B. Goebel or his attorneys, representatives, agents, or employees or (5) Lisa Solomon, or her attorneys, representatives, agents, or employees, or (6) anyone else, in any form or fashion, relating to or arising from the subject matter of this action, the 2002 Contract, or the Property, without the prior written permission of the Administrative Judge of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. Charles E. Ramos of 11

7 (FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 3 'wan 64-42". '11)FPM NYSCEF DOC. NO. 207 RECEIVED SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK - NEW YORK COUNTY PRESENT: RAMOS PART 53 Justice PFEIFFER INDEX NO /15 MID-TOWN DEV., et al V - MOTION DATE MOTION. SEQ. NO. 02 MOTION CAL NO. 0 rn Ce W >- 41MI Z 0 H u) LU 0_ w Z IM F. D- 6 W u. ui Z 0 0 u. The following papers, numbered 1 to Notice of Motion/Order to Show Cause - Affidavits - Exhibits Answering Affidavits - Exhibits Replying Affidavits Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that this motion Is,were read on this motion to/for GRANTED in its entirety, for the reasons set forth in this Court's 2/25/2016 transcript. Order signed. DATED: n CHARLES E. RAMOS J.s.c. 1. CHECK ONE. 2. CHECK AS APPROPRIATE : 3. CHECK IF APPROPRIATE : DO NOT POST CASE DISPOSED NON-FINAL DISPOSITION MOTION IS: GRANTED El DENIED GRANTED IN PART OTHER El SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER C] FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT REFERENCE 7 of 11

8 At Commercial Division Part 53 of Supreme Court of the State of New York, held in and for the County of New York, at the Courthouse thereof, located at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York on the VP(day of...f>aialy, 2016 PRESENT: HONORABLE CHARLES E. RAMOS Justice. SAMUEL PFEIFFER, - against - Plaintiff, MID-TOWN DEVELOPMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, MIDTOWN DEVELOPMENT, L.P., and TISHMAN SEYPER, Defendants. Motion Seq. Nos. 1 and 2 ORDER Defendants Mid-town Development Limited Partnership (also sued herein as Midtown Development, L.P.) (collectively, "Midtown") and Tishman Speyer Worldwide, L.L.C. (incorrectly sued here as Tishman Seyper) ("Tishman Speyer") having made motions to dismiss the Verified Amended Complaint, cancel the notices of pendency, award sanctions and for a broader litigation injunction (Motion Seq. Nos. 1 and 2) (NYSCEF Doc. Nos ) ("Motions"), and Plaintiff having cross-moved to reinstate or vacate previous actions or amend. the Verified Amended Complaint (NYSCEF Doc. No. 197), and the Motions and cross-motion having come on to be heard and considered by the Court, 8 of 11

9 Samuel Pfeiffer v..mid-town Development Limited Partnership, Page 2 of 4 NOW, upon the reading and filing of the Notice of Motion by Midtown dated September 30, 2015 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 96), the Affirmation of Jeffrey Shore with accompanying exhibits dated September 30, 2015 ((NYSCEF Doc. Nos: ), the Notice of Motion by Tishman Speyer dated September 30, 2015 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 124), and the Affirmation of Janice Mac Avoy dated September 30, 2015 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 125), all in support of the motions to dismiss, and the Plaintiff's Affidavit and Memorandum of Law dated February 24, 2016 in opposition to the Defendants' Motions and in support of Plaintiff's cross-motion (NYSCEF Doc. No. 197), and the Motions and cross-motion having come on to be heard on February 25, 2016, and the Court having heard the arguments of the parties, and due deliberation having been had, Now, upon motion of. Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson LLP, counsel for Defendant Tishman Speyer, it is hereby: ORDERED that the Motions (Motion Seq. Nos. 1 and 2) are granted and the crossmotion is denied and the Plaintiff's amended complaint be and the same is dismissed with prejudice and, it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court is hereby directed to enter judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint with prejudice, and it is further ORDERED that the notices of pendency (copies of which are attached hereto as Appendices A and B) that originally were tiled in the office of the New York County Clerk on July 21, 2015 under Kings County Supreme Court Index No /15, because this action originally was filed in Kings County Supreme Court, before this action was transferred to this Court pursuant to July 21, 2015 order of Justice Carolyn Demarest, (NYSCEF Doc. No. 70) 2 9 of 11

10 Samuel Pfeiffer v. Mid-town Development Limited Partnership, Page 3 of 4 and opened and maintained under New York County Index /2015, and involving Block 708, Lot No. 1 and Block 709 Lot No. 17, be and the same areafereby cancelled, and, it is further ORDERED that the New York County Clerk cancel forthwith both notices of pendency upon issuance of this Order, and it is further ORDERED that pursuant to 22 NYCRR (b), within telm(m)days of service of a copy of this Order with notice of its entry, Plaintiff is.directed to pay $10, as sanctions, to the Lawyers' Fund for Client Protection, which is warranted by Plaintiff's frivolous litigation and, it is further ORDERED that Samuel Pfeiffer, Chana Pfeiffer, every other Pfeiffer family member not named herein, Jericho Group, Ltd., Jericho Co., and their officers, directors, shareholders, principals, managers, affiliates, agents, attorneys and assigns, whether in their own right or as assignee, transferee or purchaser, and any other person or entity who may purport to hold an interest in the June 18, 2002 contract between Jericho Group, Ltd. and Midtown that is the subject of this action (the "2002 Contract"), be and hereby are enjoined from (A) filing notices of pendency against the property located at Block 708, Lot No. 1 and Block 709, Lot No. 17 (the "Property"), or any portion thereof, or (B) seeking to reopen this action or any prior action or commencing any action or special proceeding seeking legal or equitable relief from (1) Defendants Midtown and/or Tishman Speyer, their direct or indirect parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, partners, members, managers, shareholders, principals, trustees, beneficiaries, attorneys, representatives, agents, or employees, or (2) any other purchasers or contract vendees of the Property, or (3) any lender to any such purchaser or contract vendee, or 3 10 of 11

11 Samuel Pfeiffer v. Mid-town Development Limited Partnership, Page 4 'of 4 (4) Robert B. Goebel or his attorneys, representatives, agents, or employees or (5) Lisa Solomon, or her attorneys, representatives, agents, or employees, or (6) anyone else, in any form or fashion, relating to or arising from the subject matter of this action, the 2002 Contract, or the Property, without the prior written permission of the Administrative Judge of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County. Charles E. Ramos 3/ V/ti' of 11