FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/10/2017 11:47 AM INDEX NO. NYSCEF DOC. NO. 75 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/10/2017 NB99_002_Notice_of_Counter_Order_011017.doc SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK Plaintiff, -against_ EDWARD S. FELDMAN FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC JOHN DOE ## 1-5 intended to be the persons Plaintiff) who provided the money to Moshe Ziv for the financing of the action against Herrick, Feinstein, LLP for which investors Index No. NOTICE OF SUBMISSION OF COUNTER ORDERR Part 17 ---------------------------------------------------------------------x PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that attached is a true copy of a Counter Order which will be presented for settlement to the Hon. SHLOMO HAGLER, J.S.C, one of the judges of the within named Court, at 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, on the 17th day of January, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. A marked copy showing the proposed changes in the Order being settled by the Plaintiff is also attached. To: Edward S. Feldman, Esq. Feldman & Associates, PLLC Attorneys for Plaintiffs 33 E. 33rd Street - Suite 802 New York NY 10017 Tel: 212-685-2277 efeldman@feldmanandassociates..com Carl E. Person Defendant, Pro Se 225 E. 36th St. - Suite 3A New York NY 10016-3664 Tel: 212-307-4444 carlpers2@gmail.com
NB99_CEP_prop_counter_order-002_alone.doc At IAS Part 17 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York held in and for the County of New York, at the Court House, 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, on January, 2017 Plaintiffs, Index No. ORDER Part 17 EDWARD S. FELDMAN FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC JOHN DOE ## 1-5 intended to be the persons Plaintiff) who provided the money to Moshe Ziv for the financing of the action against Herrick, Feinstein, LLP for which investors ---------------------------------------------------------------------x Defendant Carl E. Person having moved to dismiss the Complaint under CPLR 3211(a)(1, and 7) based on documentary evidence and for failure to state a cause of action and for summary judgment dismissing the Complaint under CPLR 3212 (mot. seq. 002), and the Court having considered the papers in support of the motion (Doc. Nos. 45-46), and the papers (including a cross motion) submitted by the Plaintiffs in opposition to the motion (Doc. Nos. 1
56-58), and the reply papers submitted by the moving Defendant (Doc. Nos. 59-60); and oral argument on the motion and cross motion having been held, on the record, on December 12, 2016, and the Plaintiffs having withdrawn their Second Cause of Action (breach of contract) and Third Cause of Action (breach of fiduciary duty), and upon due deliberation, a nd as set forth in the transcript of said argument and oral decision, as supplemented by the short-form order dated December 12, 2016 (Doc. No. 65), it is ORDERED: That Defendant's motion to dismiss the First Cause of Action (legal malpractice) pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(1, and 7) is denied; and Defendant's motion under CPLR 3212 for summary judgment dismissing the Complaint is denied because the moving party had no right under the CPLR to move for relief at the same time under CPLR 3211(a)(1, and 7) and CPLR 3212. ENTER SHLOMO HAGLER, J.S.C. 2
At las Part 17 of the Supreme Court of the State ofnew York held in and for the County of New York, at the Court House, 60 Centre Street, New York, New York, on January 2017 ------------ ---------------------- ---------X Plaintiffs, ------------------------------------ --------------x EDWARDS. FELDMAN FELDMAN & ASSOCIATES, PLLC JOHN DOE## 1-5 intended to be the persons Plaintiff) who provided the money to Moshe Ziv for the fmancing of the action against Herrick, Feinstein, LLP for which investors Index No. fc f>ljiv b col( ORDER Part 17 X Defendant Carl E. Person having moved to dismiss the Complaint under CPLR 32ll(a)(l, and 7) based on documentary evidence and for failure to state a cause of action and for summary judgment dismissing the Complaint under CPLR 3212 (mot. seq. 002), and the Court having considered the papers in support of the motion (Doc. Nos. 45-46), and the papers (including a cross motion) submitted by the Plaintiffs in opposition to the motion (Doc. Nos. 1
56-58), and the reply papers submitted by the moving Defendant (Doc. Nos. 59-60); and~ral argument on the motion and cross motion having been held, on the record, on December 12, 2016, and the Plaintiffs having withdrawn their Second Cause of Action (breach of contract) and Third Cause of Action (breach of fiduciary duty), and upon due deliberation, and as set forth i n the trans c r i p t o f s a i d a r gum en t and oral decision, as supplemented by the short-form order dated --- December 12, 2 0 1 6 (Doc. No. 6 5), it is ORDERED: That Defendant's motion to dismiss the First Cause of Action (legal malpractice) pursuant to CPLR 321l(a)(l, and 7) is denied; and - Defendant's motion under CPLR 3212 for summary judgment dismissing the Complaint is denied because the moving party had no right under the CPLR to move for relief at the same time under CPLR 32ll(a)(l, and 7) and CPLR 3212. ENTER SHLOMO HAGLER, J.S.C. 2