Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
Kruzhkov Russo PLLC
Marlen Kruzhkov, Esq.
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7230
New York, New York 10118
Tel: (212) 363-2000
Fax: (917) 591-7175
Attorneys for Plaintiff Stella Stolper
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
STELLA STOLPER,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 652352/2018
ZARINA BURBACKI,
Defendant.
FIRST AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Stella Stolper (“Ms. Stolper”) by and through her undersigned counsel, as and
for her Verified Complaint allege as follows:
NATURE OF ACTION
1. Plaintiff seeks to recover tens of millions of dollars in damages for defamation
and the recovery of tens of thousands of dollars which were wrongfully retained and diverted by
Defendant Zarina Burbacki, Esq. (“Burbacki”) with the intent to deprive the Plaintiff of her
property. Burbacki exploited her position with Wikked Entertainment, Inc. (“Wikked”) to steal
from and defame Plaintiff and her business.
1 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Stella Stolper is an individual residing in the State of California. Ms.
Stolper has worked in the entertainment industry for over twenty-five years. She is a Golden
Globe award nominated producer and a successful executive and talent manager who is well-
known and highly respected in her industry. Ms. Stolper conducts business through her
management and production company, Wikked. Wikked is formed pursuant to the laws of the
State of California on or about October 2009. Wikked maintains an office at 25451 Prado de
Azul, Calabasas, California 91302. Ms. Stolper is the sole owner of the company.
3. Upon information and belief, defendant Zarina Burbacki is a resident of the State
of New York, residing at 21 West End Avenue, Ste 3608, New York, New York. Burbacki is
an attorney licensed to practice in the State of New York who regularly conducts business in
New York County. Upon information and belief, Burbacki practices law under the name of
Burbacki Law Group. Her New York State attorney registration number is 5018585. Burbacki
is Ms. Stolper’s cousin. Burbacki’s spouse is Yonatan Shimrony who also resides at 21 West
End Avenue, Ste 3608, New York, New York.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant because she is a resident
of the State of New York.
5. Venue is proper in this Court because the defendant is a resident of New York
County and regularly conduct business within New York County.
2
2 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Ms. Stolper Hires Burbacki and Shimrony
6. In late 2015, Burbacki and her husband were struggling financially. Burbacki’s
mother (who is Ms. Stolper’s aunt) reached out to Ms. Stolper to help her daughter and son-in-
law. Ms. Stolper agreed to discuss potential employment with Burbacki.
7. To induce Ms. Stolper to give Burbacki a high-level role, Burbacki purposefully
misrepresented to Ms. Stolper the extent of her legal experience and capabilities. Burbacki
falsely and purposefully claimed that she could render advice on legal contracts on behalf of
Wikked and/or Ms. Stolper personally with third parties, including but not limited to contracts
related to nuanced California labor and employment laws, and manage any and all other legal
matters that arose. Burbacki also purposefully misrepresented that she could fulfill duties as
counsel for Ms. Stolper even though she was not admitted to practice law in the State of
California and had no familiarity with its laws. Burbacki also misrepresented to Ms. Stolper her
familiarity with and ability to provide advice concerning patent and trademark law, trust and
estates law, and corporate law, among others.
8. Based on Burbacki’s misrepresentations, Ms. Stolper created a role for Burbacki
as her personal counsel as well as in-house counsel and Chief of Staff for Wikked to commence
in January 2016.
9. In return for her work, Ms. Stolper offered Burbacki a generous compensation
package, and introduced her to the entertainment industry.
10. Ms. Stolper also helped Shimrony get a job in the entertainment industry. In the
course of his employment, Shimrony frequently interfaced with Ms. Stolper and Burbacki.
3
3 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
11. Beginning in January 2016, Burbacki and Shimrony resided and worked for
Plaintiffs from New York but frequently travelled to Los Angeles, California, with travel and
expenses covered.
12. Shortly after starting to work with Ms. Stolper, the couple began to engage in
conduct meant to interfere with Plaintiffs’ existing contracts and contemplated deals and sought
to usurp such business opportunities for their own benefit.
13. Upon information and belief, Burbacki and Shimrony created YoZa Consulting
LLC (“YoZa”) on January 21, 2016 and 345 Consulting LLC (“345 Consulting”) on August 8,
2016, to serve as entities to which they could divert business opportunities they had learned, and
were learning about, from and with Ms. Stolper’s contacts in the entertainment industry. In
furtherance of the plan, the couple instructed third parties to direct payments to YoZa and/or 345
Consulting.
14. Within a few months of her employment with Ms. Stolper, and while accepting
payment for such employment, Burbacki began to divert business opportunities and to directly
perform services for Wikked/Ms. Stolper’s clients.
15. The couple also took steps to gain unauthorized access to Ms. Stolper’s
proprietary business information and to find opportunities to interfere with and attempt to usurp
business opportunities.
Burbacki’s Unauthorized Practice of Law and Breach of Duties to her Clients
16. When Burbacki was hired, she purposefully misrepresented to Ms. Stolper her
experience and knowledge of entertainment law, patent and trademark law, trust and estates law,
corporate law or other related legal fields and her ability to handle the responsibilities of an in-
4
4 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
house counsel of Wikked and personal counsel to Ms. Stolper. However, Burbacki had little to
no experience in these fields.
17. In her role as Wikked’s “in-house counsel,” Burbacki reviewed agreements
between Wikked/Ms. Stolper and certain clients. Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper against
executing certain contracts and, upon information and belief, such advice was given in bad faith
to advance her own interests.
18. Burbacki also represented to Ms. Stolper that she could obtain necessary patents
and trademarks for a contemplated skin care line Ms. Stolper was working on.
19. Based on this representation, Ms. Stolper assigned the task to Burbacki.
20. Burbacki claimed she was working on this task, but after two years passed it
became apparent that she had been misrepresenting the efforts she was making to obtain the
patents and trademarks, and that she was either not working on obtaining the necessary patents
and trademarks or failing to follow through on any work she had started.
21. The skin care line never launched due to the absence of necessary patents and
trademarks, which Burbacki claimed to have filed.
22. During the course of her employment, Burbacki also acted as a personal lawyer to
Ms. Stolper. In her role as Ms. Stolper’s counsel, Burbacki never provided an attorney retainer
letter as required by New York law.
23. In or about February 2017, without knowledge of the laws of the State of
California, or being admitted to California State Bar, Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper to set up two
California trusts to safeguard her assets. Burbacki then prepared the trust documents and named
herself and Shimrony as trustees of the trusts. Upon information and belief, Burbacki named
herself and Shimrony as trustees in an attempt to give the couple control over Ms. Stolper’s
5
5 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
assets. Burbacki purposefully misrepresented to Ms. Stolper the need for and benefit of the trust
structure.
24. Upon information and belief, Burbacki recorded private telephone conversations
she had with Ms. Stolper without Ms. Stolper’s knowledge or consent, while Burbacki knew Ms.
Stolper was in California—a crime under California law. Upon information and belief, Burbacki
engaged in such conduct to advance her own interests. The basis for this belief is that, on
numerous occasions, Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper to record private conversations without the
other person’s knowledge to be used for future purposes. Ms. Stolper never made any such
recordings. In addition, a third party advised Ms. Stolper that Burbacki had played one such
recording in their presence.
25. Upon information and belief, Burbacki also forged Ms. Stolper signature on
various documents, including contracts, without Ms. Stolper’s knowledge or permission.
Unauthorized Access of Ms. Stolper’s Emails
26. Shortly after hiring Burbacki, Ms. Stolper allowed Burbacki to access her emails
for the limited purpose of assisting Ms. Stolper with scheduling. However, upon information
and belief, Burbacki repeatedly accessed Ms. Stolper’s emails for purposes exceeding the limited
authorization, including to surreptitiously collect information that was used to interfere with and
usurp business opportunities.
27. In or around June 2017, Burbacki and Shimrony suggested to Ms. Stolper that she
change passwords to her accounts to increase the security of her email and offered to assist with
this task. While purporting to assist Ms. Stolper with this task, Burbacki and Shimrony
designated themselves as the administrators of Ms. Stolper’s email accounts, without Ms.
6
6 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
Stolper’s knowledge or permission, which enabled them to access the email and change
passwords.
28. Upon information and belief, Shimrony periodically and without authorization
accessed Ms. Stolper’s accounts to gain information and knowledge of all of Ms. Stolper’s
professional and private affairs.
29. In October 2017, Burbacki and/or Shimrony changed the password to Ms.
Stolper’s email, causing her to be unable to access her email. When Ms. Stolper called the
electronic communication service provider to attempt to regain access, she learned for the first
time that they had made themselves (and not her) administrators of the email account.
30. Upon information and belief, the couple accessed Ms. Stolper’s email on
numerous occasions to view communications between Ms. Stolper and third parties which they
used to their advantage in furtherance of their tortious acts.
Management of Plaintiffs’ Finances
31. In the course of her employment, Burbacki also gained access to and control over
all of Ms. Stolper’s and Wikked’s bank accounts and records and directly interfaced with Ms.
Stolper’s business manager.
32. Burbacki represented to Ms. Stolper that her funds would be more secure in an
attorney escrow account. Ms. Stolper believed and relied on such representation. Burbacki
convinced Ms. Stolper to permit commissions she earned to be deposited and held in a sub-
account of Burbacki’s attorney escrow account. Burbacki purported to then maintain and track
her funds and make the necessary transfers to Ms. Stolper’s personal bank accounts as requested.
33. Until mid-2016, Burbacki would periodically provide Ms. Stolper a detailed
balance sheet and an accounting of her finances in the form of a ledger.
7
7 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
34. However, Burbacki later ceased providing a formal accounting in due course and,
instead, provided Ms. Stolper with a mere list of her account balances by email or text message.
See Exhibit A. Despite repeated requests by Ms. Stolper, as well as her business managers and
accountants, to provide a formal accounting, Burbacki repeatedly and purposefully failed to do
so.
35. On August 26, 2016, Burbacki received $250,000 into her attorney escrow
account for the benefit of Ms. Stolper. At or about the time the funds came into the escrow
account, Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper that she received the $250,000 for Ms. Stolper’s benefit.
36. Upon Ms. Stolper’s request for return of the funds, Burbacki transferred $125,000
of those funds to Ms. Stolper. However, Burbacki withheld $125,000 and failed to send Ms.
Stolper the remaining $125,000. In addition, Burbacki failed to account for those funds in the
“balance” of Ms. Stolper’s funds in the escrow account.
37. Upon information and belief, Burbacki converted the other $125,000 for her own
benefit. Burbacki attempted to hide her misappropriation of the funds by ceasing to provide
formal accountings. Despite demands, Burbacki failed to return the $125,000 to Ms. Stolper.
38. In August 2017, Ms. Stolper requested her account balances held in Burbacki’s
attorney escrow account. Burbacki claimed that she only had $500,000 in escrow for the benefit
of Ms. Stolper including $150,000 which was held in escrow for Ms. Stolper from Shimrony’s
father. Avi Shimrony (Stolper’s uncle) had who expressly given the money as a gift to Ms.
Stolper for the benefit of her children. Ms. Stolper thereafter requested that all her funds in
Burbacki’s escrow account be returned. In the beginning of September 2017, Burbacki
transferred $350,000 from her escrow account to Ms. Stolper’s bank account, withholding the
additional $150,000.
8
8 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
39. Despite repeated demands, Burbacki has refused to return the $150,000 and her
attorney represented that Ms. Stolper’s escrowed funds were transferred without Ms. Stolper’s
authorization or knowledge to Burbacki’s father-in-law, Avi Shimrony, in direct violation of
Burbacki’s obligations as Ms. Stolper’s attorney.
Burbacki and Shimrony Defame Ms. Stopler
40. In the Summer of 2017, Burbacki and Shimrony openly and repeatedly disparaged
Ms. Stolper to her clients, staff members, and others with whom Ms. Stolper regularly interfaced
in business. The statements regarding Ms. Stolper’s business conduct impugned her character in
her professional context and were false and defamatory per se.
41. On or about August 29, 2017, in Denver, Colorado, Burbacki made false and
defamatory statements to entertainment industry personnel that Ms. Stolper was stealing from
her sole client, MC1. The defendants alleged that Ms. Stopler was improperly structuring deals to
take a bigger cut of the revenue from the deal, was charging MC false agent’s commissions for
matters in which she had not acted as an agent but as a partner in a joint venture between MC
and Ms. Stopler, and that she was hiding those “stolen” funds in a secret bank account. Burbacki
falsely represented that this secret bank account had $5 million in it.
42. On October 14, 2017, Burbacki and Shimrony came to Foxwoods Casino in
Connecticut and, upon information and belief, participated in a clandestine meeting with Ms.
Stopler’s sole client, MC where they repeated the falsities they had been spreading about Ms.
Stolper concerning her purported self-dealing and theft and impugned her character and
intentions as a talent manager.
1
To protect the identity of this non‐party, Defendant is using a pseudonym as allowed by….
9
9 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
43. Upon information and belief, at that meeting, Burbacki shared with MC and
others an illegally recorded telephone call between her and Ms. Stolper, which was taken out of
context to support her false, misleading and defamatory statements.
44. Upon information and belief, the purpose of Burbacki and Shimrony’s conduct
was to defame her character to purposely interfere with Ms. Stolper’s current and future business
relationship and contracts with MC which included her services as her manager and agent, from
which she derived a commission and her partnership with MC on several lucrative prospective
joint business opportunities as well as with her contracts, and prospective business opportunities
with other clients.
45. On October 21, 2017, Ms. Stolper received an email from Sony Pictures—her
long-established contact—informing her that Burbacki attempted to communicate with the studio
and obtain confidential information on ongoing deals, and purposefully excluded Ms. Stolper
from the communication. Upon information and belief, Burbacki reached out to several other
business contacts of Ms. Stolper in an attempt to usurp business opportunities.
46. Ultimately, Burbacki and Shimrony were successful in causing MC and other
third parties to terminate existing contracts with Ms. Stolper and undermining prospective deals
from which Ms. Stolper expected to make significant revenue.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Conversion Against Burbacki)
47. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 46 above
as though fully set forth herein.
48. Burbacki received and retained in her attorney escrow account at least $275,000
belonging to Stolper when she was terminated as counsel.
10
10 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
49. On numerous occasions, Ms. Stolper demanded that Burbacki return the funds
remaining in the escrow account. Burbacki refused to return them by stating that there are no
more funds in the account that belonged to Ms. Stolper.
50. Ms. Stolper made a demand on Avi Shimrony for return of the funds as well.
51. By failing to release the escrowed funds to Ms. Stolper after numerous demands,
Burbacki interfered to the exclusion of Ms. Stolper’s rights over her property.
52. Based on the foregoing and as a result of such acts, Ms. Stolper has been injured
in an amount to be determined at trial, but which is now believed to be in excess of $275,000,
plus interests and costs.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach of Fiduciary Duty Against Burbacki – Escrow Funds)
53. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 52 above
as though fully set forth herein.
54. As Ms. Stolper’s attorney, Burbacki owed a fiduciary duty to Ms. Stolper.
55. When Burbacki received funds for the benefit of Ms. Stolper, she was obligated to
safeguard such funds and to deliver the funds to Ms. Stolper upon instruction to do so.
56. By failing to release the escrowed funds to Ms. Stolper, Burbacki breached her
fiduciary duty to Ms. Stolper.
57. Based on the foregoing and as a result of Burbacki’s acts, Ms. Stolper has been
injured in an amount to be determined at trial, but which is now believed to be in excess of
$275,000, plus interests and costs.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Defamation per se Against Burbacki)
58. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 57 above
as though fully set forth herein.
11
11 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
59. In late August 2017 in Denver Colorado and again in October 2017 at Foxwoods
Casino, Connecticut Burbacki and Shimrony published false and slanderous statements that Ms.
Stolper was stealing from her sole client, MC, and improperly structuring deals to take a bigger
cut of the revenue and hiding “stolen” funds in a secret account.
60. Burbacki and Shimrony knew that the statements were false at the time they were
made. These statements, which accuse Ms. Stolper of unethical, disloyal and/or fraudulent
conduct and intentions in her business dealings with her client, were and are injurious to Ms.
Stolper’s business reputation, trade, occupation, or business, and for this reason constitute
defamation per se.
61. These statements were made in bad faith, for no legitimate purpose, and with
malice and intent to damage Ms. Stolper’s reputation, to discredit and embarrass her, to harm her
financially, and/or to gain unfair advantage in Burbacki and Shimrony’s attempt to interfere with
and usurp Ms. Stolper’s business.
62. Burbacki and Shimrony knew, expected, and intended that their false and
slanderous statements would injure the reputation of Ms. Stolper, impede her in her business,
cause her contempt and ridicule, and impeach her honesty and integrity. They uttered or
published those statements deliberately to bring these very results.
63. The false statements uttered by Burbacki and Shimrony have caused Ms. Stolper
to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, loss of her professional reputation, financial loss,
termination of contractual relationships, and among other things, all to her significant detriment.
64. By reason of Burbacki and Shimrony’s false statements, which were made
knowingly, intentionally, willfully, with malicious disregard for Ms. Stolper’s rights, and with
the intent to harm, Ms. Stolper has been harmed and injured emotionally, professionally, and
12
12 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
financially, and is entitled to damages in an amount established at a trial, but which is now
believed to be in excess of $20 million, plus interests and costs.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Accounting Against Burbacki)
65. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 65 above
as though fully set forth herein.
66. Ms. Stolper and Wikked are entitled to an accounting of all moneys belonging to
them that passed through and were deposited in Burbacki’s attorney escrow accounts.
67. Ms. Stolper and Wikked (as well as their various business managers and
accountants) repeatedly have demanded an accounting and Burbacki has refused to provide it.
68. Ms. Stolper and Wikked hereby demand that an accounting be granted to them.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Legal Malpractice Against Burbacki)
69. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 68 above
as though fully set forth herein.
70. In the course of their employment as Ms. Stolper’s and Wikked’s attorneys,
Burbacki consistently committed malpractice by either negligently and improperly performing
legal tasks or by negligently failing to perform necessary and required legal tasks.
71. As a result of Burbacki’s conduct, Ms. Stolper and Wikked were damaged in an
amount to be determined at trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that an Order be made and entered:
a. On the First Cause of Action, holding Burbacki liable for damages in an amount
to be determined at trial, but no less than $275,000;
13
13 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
b. On the Second Cause of Action, holding Burbacki liable for damages in an
amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $275,000;
c. On the Third Cause of Action, holding Burbacki and Shimrony jointly and
severally liable for damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less
than $20,000,000;
d. On the Fourth Cause of Action, ordering Burbacki to provide an accounting;
e. On the Fifth Cause of Action, holding Burbacki liable for damages in an amount
to be determined at trial;
f. Granting attorneys’ fees and costs of this suit;
g. Granting an award of punitive damages as the Court deems just and proper; and
h. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
Dated: December 4, 2019
New York, New York
KRUZHKOV RUSSO PLLC
By: /s/ Marlen Kruzhkov p
Marlen Kruzhkov, Esq.
350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7230
New York, New York 10118
Tel.: (212) 363-2000
marlen@kruzhkovrusso.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Stella Stolper
14
14 of 15
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019
01/17/2020 02:37
04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71
87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019
01/17/2020
VERIFICATION
Marlen Kruzhkov, Esq., being duly sworn, deposes and says that I am a managing member of
Kruzhkov Russo PLLC, attorneys for Plaintiff Stella Stolper, in this proceeding, and that I have
read the attached Verified Complaint and exhibit thereto, and all the contents thereof are true to
my knowledge, except as to matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as
to those matters, I believe them to be true. The grounds of my information and the sources of my
belief are conversations with the Plaintiff and review of relevant records and files. I am making
this verification because Ms. Stolper is not located in the county where Kruzhkov Russo PLLC
maintains its office.
Sworn to before me this 4th day of December 2019
Notary Public
SARAH Y. KHURANA
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 02KH6240194
Qualified in New York County
J/tJ
My Commission Expires May 2 , 1
15 of 15
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 Kruzhkov Russo PLLC Marlen Kruzhkov, Esq. The Empire State Building 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7230 New York, New York 10118 Tel: (212) 363-2000 Fax: (917) 591-7175 Attorneys for Plaintiff Stella Stolper SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK STELLA STOLPER, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 652352/2018 ZARINA BURBACKI, Defendant. FIRST AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT Plaintiff Stella Stolper (“Ms. Stolper”) by and through her undersigned counsel, as and for her Verified Complaint allege as follows: NATURE OF ACTION 1. Plaintiff seeks to recover tens of millions of dollars in damages for defamation and the recovery of tens of thousands of dollars which were wrongfully retained and diverted by Defendant Zarina Burbacki, Esq. (“Burbacki”) with the intent to deprive the Plaintiff of her property. Burbacki exploited her position with Wikked Entertainment, Inc. (“Wikked”) to steal from and defame Plaintiff and her business. 1 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 PARTIES 2. Plaintiff Stella Stolper is an individual residing in the State of California. Ms. Stolper has worked in the entertainment industry for over twenty-five years. She is a Golden Globe award nominated producer and a successful executive and talent manager who is well- known and highly respected in her industry. Ms. Stolper conducts business through her management and production company, Wikked. Wikked is formed pursuant to the laws of the State of California on or about October 2009. Wikked maintains an office at 25451 Prado de Azul, Calabasas, California 91302. Ms. Stolper is the sole owner of the company. 3. Upon information and belief, defendant Zarina Burbacki is a resident of the State of New York, residing at 21 West End Avenue, Ste 3608, New York, New York. Burbacki is an attorney licensed to practice in the State of New York who regularly conducts business in New York County. Upon information and belief, Burbacki practices law under the name of Burbacki Law Group. Her New York State attorney registration number is 5018585. Burbacki is Ms. Stolper’s cousin. Burbacki’s spouse is Yonatan Shimrony who also resides at 21 West End Avenue, Ste 3608, New York, New York. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant because she is a resident of the State of New York. 5. Venue is proper in this Court because the defendant is a resident of New York County and regularly conduct business within New York County. 2 2 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 FACTUAL BACKGROUND Ms. Stolper Hires Burbacki and Shimrony 6. In late 2015, Burbacki and her husband were struggling financially. Burbacki’s mother (who is Ms. Stolper’s aunt) reached out to Ms. Stolper to help her daughter and son-in- law. Ms. Stolper agreed to discuss potential employment with Burbacki. 7. To induce Ms. Stolper to give Burbacki a high-level role, Burbacki purposefully misrepresented to Ms. Stolper the extent of her legal experience and capabilities. Burbacki falsely and purposefully claimed that she could render advice on legal contracts on behalf of Wikked and/or Ms. Stolper personally with third parties, including but not limited to contracts related to nuanced California labor and employment laws, and manage any and all other legal matters that arose. Burbacki also purposefully misrepresented that she could fulfill duties as counsel for Ms. Stolper even though she was not admitted to practice law in the State of California and had no familiarity with its laws. Burbacki also misrepresented to Ms. Stolper her familiarity with and ability to provide advice concerning patent and trademark law, trust and estates law, and corporate law, among others. 8. Based on Burbacki’s misrepresentations, Ms. Stolper created a role for Burbacki as her personal counsel as well as in-house counsel and Chief of Staff for Wikked to commence in January 2016. 9. In return for her work, Ms. Stolper offered Burbacki a generous compensation package, and introduced her to the entertainment industry. 10. Ms. Stolper also helped Shimrony get a job in the entertainment industry. In the course of his employment, Shimrony frequently interfaced with Ms. Stolper and Burbacki. 3 3 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 11. Beginning in January 2016, Burbacki and Shimrony resided and worked for Plaintiffs from New York but frequently travelled to Los Angeles, California, with travel and expenses covered. 12. Shortly after starting to work with Ms. Stolper, the couple began to engage in conduct meant to interfere with Plaintiffs’ existing contracts and contemplated deals and sought to usurp such business opportunities for their own benefit. 13. Upon information and belief, Burbacki and Shimrony created YoZa Consulting LLC (“YoZa”) on January 21, 2016 and 345 Consulting LLC (“345 Consulting”) on August 8, 2016, to serve as entities to which they could divert business opportunities they had learned, and were learning about, from and with Ms. Stolper’s contacts in the entertainment industry. In furtherance of the plan, the couple instructed third parties to direct payments to YoZa and/or 345 Consulting. 14. Within a few months of her employment with Ms. Stolper, and while accepting payment for such employment, Burbacki began to divert business opportunities and to directly perform services for Wikked/Ms. Stolper’s clients. 15. The couple also took steps to gain unauthorized access to Ms. Stolper’s proprietary business information and to find opportunities to interfere with and attempt to usurp business opportunities. Burbacki’s Unauthorized Practice of Law and Breach of Duties to her Clients 16. When Burbacki was hired, she purposefully misrepresented to Ms. Stolper her experience and knowledge of entertainment law, patent and trademark law, trust and estates law, corporate law or other related legal fields and her ability to handle the responsibilities of an in- 4 4 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 house counsel of Wikked and personal counsel to Ms. Stolper. However, Burbacki had little to no experience in these fields. 17. In her role as Wikked’s “in-house counsel,” Burbacki reviewed agreements between Wikked/Ms. Stolper and certain clients. Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper against executing certain contracts and, upon information and belief, such advice was given in bad faith to advance her own interests. 18. Burbacki also represented to Ms. Stolper that she could obtain necessary patents and trademarks for a contemplated skin care line Ms. Stolper was working on. 19. Based on this representation, Ms. Stolper assigned the task to Burbacki. 20. Burbacki claimed she was working on this task, but after two years passed it became apparent that she had been misrepresenting the efforts she was making to obtain the patents and trademarks, and that she was either not working on obtaining the necessary patents and trademarks or failing to follow through on any work she had started. 21. The skin care line never launched due to the absence of necessary patents and trademarks, which Burbacki claimed to have filed. 22. During the course of her employment, Burbacki also acted as a personal lawyer to Ms. Stolper. In her role as Ms. Stolper’s counsel, Burbacki never provided an attorney retainer letter as required by New York law. 23. In or about February 2017, without knowledge of the laws of the State of California, or being admitted to California State Bar, Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper to set up two California trusts to safeguard her assets. Burbacki then prepared the trust documents and named herself and Shimrony as trustees of the trusts. Upon information and belief, Burbacki named herself and Shimrony as trustees in an attempt to give the couple control over Ms. Stolper’s 5 5 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 assets. Burbacki purposefully misrepresented to Ms. Stolper the need for and benefit of the trust structure. 24. Upon information and belief, Burbacki recorded private telephone conversations she had with Ms. Stolper without Ms. Stolper’s knowledge or consent, while Burbacki knew Ms. Stolper was in California—a crime under California law. Upon information and belief, Burbacki engaged in such conduct to advance her own interests. The basis for this belief is that, on numerous occasions, Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper to record private conversations without the other person’s knowledge to be used for future purposes. Ms. Stolper never made any such recordings. In addition, a third party advised Ms. Stolper that Burbacki had played one such recording in their presence. 25. Upon information and belief, Burbacki also forged Ms. Stolper signature on various documents, including contracts, without Ms. Stolper’s knowledge or permission. Unauthorized Access of Ms. Stolper’s Emails 26. Shortly after hiring Burbacki, Ms. Stolper allowed Burbacki to access her emails for the limited purpose of assisting Ms. Stolper with scheduling. However, upon information and belief, Burbacki repeatedly accessed Ms. Stolper’s emails for purposes exceeding the limited authorization, including to surreptitiously collect information that was used to interfere with and usurp business opportunities. 27. In or around June 2017, Burbacki and Shimrony suggested to Ms. Stolper that she change passwords to her accounts to increase the security of her email and offered to assist with this task. While purporting to assist Ms. Stolper with this task, Burbacki and Shimrony designated themselves as the administrators of Ms. Stolper’s email accounts, without Ms. 6 6 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 Stolper’s knowledge or permission, which enabled them to access the email and change passwords. 28. Upon information and belief, Shimrony periodically and without authorization accessed Ms. Stolper’s accounts to gain information and knowledge of all of Ms. Stolper’s professional and private affairs. 29. In October 2017, Burbacki and/or Shimrony changed the password to Ms. Stolper’s email, causing her to be unable to access her email. When Ms. Stolper called the electronic communication service provider to attempt to regain access, she learned for the first time that they had made themselves (and not her) administrators of the email account. 30. Upon information and belief, the couple accessed Ms. Stolper’s email on numerous occasions to view communications between Ms. Stolper and third parties which they used to their advantage in furtherance of their tortious acts. Management of Plaintiffs’ Finances 31. In the course of her employment, Burbacki also gained access to and control over all of Ms. Stolper’s and Wikked’s bank accounts and records and directly interfaced with Ms. Stolper’s business manager. 32. Burbacki represented to Ms. Stolper that her funds would be more secure in an attorney escrow account. Ms. Stolper believed and relied on such representation. Burbacki convinced Ms. Stolper to permit commissions she earned to be deposited and held in a sub- account of Burbacki’s attorney escrow account. Burbacki purported to then maintain and track her funds and make the necessary transfers to Ms. Stolper’s personal bank accounts as requested. 33. Until mid-2016, Burbacki would periodically provide Ms. Stolper a detailed balance sheet and an accounting of her finances in the form of a ledger. 7 7 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 34. However, Burbacki later ceased providing a formal accounting in due course and, instead, provided Ms. Stolper with a mere list of her account balances by email or text message. See Exhibit A. Despite repeated requests by Ms. Stolper, as well as her business managers and accountants, to provide a formal accounting, Burbacki repeatedly and purposefully failed to do so. 35. On August 26, 2016, Burbacki received $250,000 into her attorney escrow account for the benefit of Ms. Stolper. At or about the time the funds came into the escrow account, Burbacki advised Ms. Stolper that she received the $250,000 for Ms. Stolper’s benefit. 36. Upon Ms. Stolper’s request for return of the funds, Burbacki transferred $125,000 of those funds to Ms. Stolper. However, Burbacki withheld $125,000 and failed to send Ms. Stolper the remaining $125,000. In addition, Burbacki failed to account for those funds in the “balance” of Ms. Stolper’s funds in the escrow account. 37. Upon information and belief, Burbacki converted the other $125,000 for her own benefit. Burbacki attempted to hide her misappropriation of the funds by ceasing to provide formal accountings. Despite demands, Burbacki failed to return the $125,000 to Ms. Stolper. 38. In August 2017, Ms. Stolper requested her account balances held in Burbacki’s attorney escrow account. Burbacki claimed that she only had $500,000 in escrow for the benefit of Ms. Stolper including $150,000 which was held in escrow for Ms. Stolper from Shimrony’s father. Avi Shimrony (Stolper’s uncle) had who expressly given the money as a gift to Ms. Stolper for the benefit of her children. Ms. Stolper thereafter requested that all her funds in Burbacki’s escrow account be returned. In the beginning of September 2017, Burbacki transferred $350,000 from her escrow account to Ms. Stolper’s bank account, withholding the additional $150,000. 8 8 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 39. Despite repeated demands, Burbacki has refused to return the $150,000 and her attorney represented that Ms. Stolper’s escrowed funds were transferred without Ms. Stolper’s authorization or knowledge to Burbacki’s father-in-law, Avi Shimrony, in direct violation of Burbacki’s obligations as Ms. Stolper’s attorney. Burbacki and Shimrony Defame Ms. Stopler 40. In the Summer of 2017, Burbacki and Shimrony openly and repeatedly disparaged Ms. Stolper to her clients, staff members, and others with whom Ms. Stolper regularly interfaced in business. The statements regarding Ms. Stolper’s business conduct impugned her character in her professional context and were false and defamatory per se. 41. On or about August 29, 2017, in Denver, Colorado, Burbacki made false and defamatory statements to entertainment industry personnel that Ms. Stolper was stealing from her sole client, MC1. The defendants alleged that Ms. Stopler was improperly structuring deals to take a bigger cut of the revenue from the deal, was charging MC false agent’s commissions for matters in which she had not acted as an agent but as a partner in a joint venture between MC and Ms. Stopler, and that she was hiding those “stolen” funds in a secret bank account. Burbacki falsely represented that this secret bank account had $5 million in it. 42. On October 14, 2017, Burbacki and Shimrony came to Foxwoods Casino in Connecticut and, upon information and belief, participated in a clandestine meeting with Ms. Stopler’s sole client, MC where they repeated the falsities they had been spreading about Ms. Stolper concerning her purported self-dealing and theft and impugned her character and intentions as a talent manager. 1 To protect the identity of this non‐party, Defendant is using a pseudonym as allowed by…. 9 9 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 43. Upon information and belief, at that meeting, Burbacki shared with MC and others an illegally recorded telephone call between her and Ms. Stolper, which was taken out of context to support her false, misleading and defamatory statements. 44. Upon information and belief, the purpose of Burbacki and Shimrony’s conduct was to defame her character to purposely interfere with Ms. Stolper’s current and future business relationship and contracts with MC which included her services as her manager and agent, from which she derived a commission and her partnership with MC on several lucrative prospective joint business opportunities as well as with her contracts, and prospective business opportunities with other clients. 45. On October 21, 2017, Ms. Stolper received an email from Sony Pictures—her long-established contact—informing her that Burbacki attempted to communicate with the studio and obtain confidential information on ongoing deals, and purposefully excluded Ms. Stolper from the communication. Upon information and belief, Burbacki reached out to several other business contacts of Ms. Stolper in an attempt to usurp business opportunities. 46. Ultimately, Burbacki and Shimrony were successful in causing MC and other third parties to terminate existing contracts with Ms. Stolper and undermining prospective deals from which Ms. Stolper expected to make significant revenue. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Conversion Against Burbacki) 47. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 46 above as though fully set forth herein. 48. Burbacki received and retained in her attorney escrow account at least $275,000 belonging to Stolper when she was terminated as counsel. 10 10 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 49. On numerous occasions, Ms. Stolper demanded that Burbacki return the funds remaining in the escrow account. Burbacki refused to return them by stating that there are no more funds in the account that belonged to Ms. Stolper. 50. Ms. Stolper made a demand on Avi Shimrony for return of the funds as well. 51. By failing to release the escrowed funds to Ms. Stolper after numerous demands, Burbacki interfered to the exclusion of Ms. Stolper’s rights over her property. 52. Based on the foregoing and as a result of such acts, Ms. Stolper has been injured in an amount to be determined at trial, but which is now believed to be in excess of $275,000, plus interests and costs. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Fiduciary Duty Against Burbacki – Escrow Funds) 53. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 52 above as though fully set forth herein. 54. As Ms. Stolper’s attorney, Burbacki owed a fiduciary duty to Ms. Stolper. 55. When Burbacki received funds for the benefit of Ms. Stolper, she was obligated to safeguard such funds and to deliver the funds to Ms. Stolper upon instruction to do so. 56. By failing to release the escrowed funds to Ms. Stolper, Burbacki breached her fiduciary duty to Ms. Stolper. 57. Based on the foregoing and as a result of Burbacki’s acts, Ms. Stolper has been injured in an amount to be determined at trial, but which is now believed to be in excess of $275,000, plus interests and costs. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Defamation per se Against Burbacki) 58. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 57 above as though fully set forth herein. 11 11 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 59. In late August 2017 in Denver Colorado and again in October 2017 at Foxwoods Casino, Connecticut Burbacki and Shimrony published false and slanderous statements that Ms. Stolper was stealing from her sole client, MC, and improperly structuring deals to take a bigger cut of the revenue and hiding “stolen” funds in a secret account. 60. Burbacki and Shimrony knew that the statements were false at the time they were made. These statements, which accuse Ms. Stolper of unethical, disloyal and/or fraudulent conduct and intentions in her business dealings with her client, were and are injurious to Ms. Stolper’s business reputation, trade, occupation, or business, and for this reason constitute defamation per se. 61. These statements were made in bad faith, for no legitimate purpose, and with malice and intent to damage Ms. Stolper’s reputation, to discredit and embarrass her, to harm her financially, and/or to gain unfair advantage in Burbacki and Shimrony’s attempt to interfere with and usurp Ms. Stolper’s business. 62. Burbacki and Shimrony knew, expected, and intended that their false and slanderous statements would injure the reputation of Ms. Stolper, impede her in her business, cause her contempt and ridicule, and impeach her honesty and integrity. They uttered or published those statements deliberately to bring these very results. 63. The false statements uttered by Burbacki and Shimrony have caused Ms. Stolper to suffer emotional distress, humiliation, loss of her professional reputation, financial loss, termination of contractual relationships, and among other things, all to her significant detriment. 64. By reason of Burbacki and Shimrony’s false statements, which were made knowingly, intentionally, willfully, with malicious disregard for Ms. Stolper’s rights, and with the intent to harm, Ms. Stolper has been harmed and injured emotionally, professionally, and 12 12 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 financially, and is entitled to damages in an amount established at a trial, but which is now believed to be in excess of $20 million, plus interests and costs. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Accounting Against Burbacki) 65. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 65 above as though fully set forth herein. 66. Ms. Stolper and Wikked are entitled to an accounting of all moneys belonging to them that passed through and were deposited in Burbacki’s attorney escrow accounts. 67. Ms. Stolper and Wikked (as well as their various business managers and accountants) repeatedly have demanded an accounting and Burbacki has refused to provide it. 68. Ms. Stolper and Wikked hereby demand that an accounting be granted to them. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Legal Malpractice Against Burbacki) 69. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the foregoing paragraphs 1 through 68 above as though fully set forth herein. 70. In the course of their employment as Ms. Stolper’s and Wikked’s attorneys, Burbacki consistently committed malpractice by either negligently and improperly performing legal tasks or by negligently failing to perform necessary and required legal tasks. 71. As a result of Burbacki’s conduct, Ms. Stolper and Wikked were damaged in an amount to be determined at trial. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that an Order be made and entered: a. On the First Cause of Action, holding Burbacki liable for damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $275,000; 13 13 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 b. On the Second Cause of Action, holding Burbacki liable for damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $275,000; c. On the Third Cause of Action, holding Burbacki and Shimrony jointly and severally liable for damages in an amount to be determined at trial, but no less than $20,000,000; d. On the Fourth Cause of Action, ordering Burbacki to provide an accounting; e. On the Fifth Cause of Action, holding Burbacki liable for damages in an amount to be determined at trial; f. Granting attorneys’ fees and costs of this suit; g. Granting an award of punitive damages as the Court deems just and proper; and h. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. Dated: December 4, 2019 New York, New York KRUZHKOV RUSSO PLLC By: /s/ Marlen Kruzhkov p Marlen Kruzhkov, Esq. 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 7230 New York, New York 10118 Tel.: (212) 363-2000 marlen@kruzhkovrusso.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Stella Stolper 14 14 of 15 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 02:37 04:53 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 71 87 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 12/04/2019 01/17/2020 VERIFICATION Marlen Kruzhkov, Esq., being duly sworn, deposes and says that I am a managing member of Kruzhkov Russo PLLC, attorneys for Plaintiff Stella Stolper, in this proceeding, and that I have read the attached Verified Complaint and exhibit thereto, and all the contents thereof are true to my knowledge, except as to matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. The grounds of my information and the sources of my belief are conversations with the Plaintiff and review of relevant records and files. I am making this verification because Ms. Stolper is not located in the county where Kruzhkov Russo PLLC maintains its office. Sworn to before me this 4th day of December 2019 Notary Public SARAH Y. KHURANA Notary Public, State of New York No. 02KH6240194 Qualified in New York County J/tJ My Commission Expires May 2 , 1 15 of 15