arrow left
arrow right
  • Stella Stolper v. Zarina Burbacki Commercial Division document preview
  • Stella Stolper v. Zarina Burbacki Commercial Division document preview
  • Stella Stolper v. Zarina Burbacki Commercial Division document preview
  • Stella Stolper v. Zarina Burbacki Commercial Division document preview
						
                                

Preview

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/18/2022 04/20/2022 04:56 02:55 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 169 171 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/18/2022 04/20/2022 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART 53 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------X STELLA STOLPER INDEX NO. 652352/2018 Plaintiff, MOTION DATE 01/28/2022 -v- MOTION SEQ. NO. 012 ZARINA BURBACKI, Defendant. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------X HON. ANDREW BORROK: The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 012) 159, 160, 161, 162, 164, 165, 167, 168 were read on this motion to/for ALTERNATE SERVICE . Upon the foregoing documents, the Order to Show Cause must be granted. The plaintiff in this action has always maintained that a $150,000 gift was misappropriated by Zarina Burbacki out of her escrow account. The gift allegedly came from Avi Shimrony to thank the plaintiff for the opportunity. Mr. Shimrony’s testimony is relevant to this issue. As such, his deposition is proper (Matter of Kapon v Koch, 23 NY3d 32, 38 [2014]). The defendant’s argument that the Stella Stolper gave testimony that contradicts this assertion both overstates the testimony and does not dispose of the issue. At her deposition, Ms. Stolper did testify that although the gift was not handed to her personally by Mr. Shimrony, and that she could not physically identify him, she has met him and she understood the gift to have come from him (NYSCEF Doc. No. 168, 168:22-24). In any event, to the extent that her testimony presented some lack of clarity as to the source of this alleged $150,000, this is proper impeachment material should this case go to trial. It is not a basis upon which to arrest discovery and the development of the record. Thus, the subpoenas shall be presented to the court to be so-ordered and the deposition of Mr. Shimrony 652352/2018 STOLPER, STELLA vs. BURBACKI, ZARINA Page 1 of 2 Motion No. 012 1 of 2 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/18/2022 04/20/2022 04:56 02:55 PM INDEX NO. 652352/2018 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 169 171 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/18/2022 04/20/2022 must be scheduled forthwith. The parties are directed to submit a stipulation as to the date for Mr. Shimrony’s deposition which shall occur on or before April 30, 2022. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the order to show cause seeking the court’s authorization for alternate service is granted; and it is further ORDERED that the parties shall submit a stipulation as to the date for Mr. Shimrony’s deposition. 4/18/2022 DATE ANDREW BORROK, J.S.C. CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED X NON-FINAL DISPOSITION X GRANTED DENIED GRANTED IN PART OTHER APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORDER CHECK IF APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSFER/REASSIGN FIDUCIARY APPOINTMENT REFERENCE 652352/2018 STOLPER, STELLA vs. BURBACKI, ZARINA Page 2 of 2 Motion No. 012 2 of 2