Motion-Secondary: James Moran v. Grand Slam Ventures, Llc, Jon Steinberg, Glenn A. Reiner, Jg Real Estate Ventures, Llc, 'John Does' 1-10 Inclusive, The Last Ten Names Being Fictitious And Unknown To Plaintiff

On May 27, 2022 a Motion-Secondary was filed involving a dispute between James Moran, and Glenn A. Reiner, Grand Slam Ventures, Llc, Jg Real Estate Ventures, Llc, 'John Does' 1-10 Inclusive, The Last Ten Names Being Fictitious And Unknown To Plaintiff, Jon Steinberg, for Other Matters - Contract - Other in the District Court of Nassau County.

Preview
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
_____________________________________________________________________Ç

JAMES MORAN, AFFIRMATION IN

OPPOSITION TO
Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION
FOR SANCTIONS
-against-

GRAND SLAM VENTURES, LLC, JON STEINBERG, (Motion Sequence No. 4)
GLENN A. REINER, JG REAL ESTATE VENTURES,
DOES"
LLC, and "JOHN # 1-10 inclusive, the last ten Index No. 001052/2019

names being fictitious and unknown to plaintiff,

Defendants.

----------------__----------_________________________________________Ç

STATE OF NEW YORK )
ss.:

COUNTY OF NEW YORK )

Richard H. Del Valle, an attorney duly admitted to practice law before the courts

of the State of New York, hereby affirms the following to be true under the penalties of perjury:

1. I am a partner in the law firm Siegel & Reiner LLP, attorneys for Defendants

Grand Slam Ventures, LLC ("Grand Slam"), Jon Steinberg ("Mr. Steinberg"),

Glenn A. Reiner ("Mr. Reiner"), and JG Real Estate Ventures, LLC ("JG")

(collectively, the "Defendants") in this action. I make this affirmation in support

of the within motion for an Order:

(i) Denying Plaintiff's motion for sanctions; and

(ii) for such other, further, and different relief that the Court deems just,

proper, and equitable.

Moran"
2. The Plaintiff, James Moran ("Mr. or "Plaintiff"), commenced this action

on September 25, 2019 by the purchase of an index number and the filing of a

Summons and Verified Complaint (the "Complaint"). A copy of the Complaint is

1 of 7
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

¹
annexed to the Plaintiff's moving papers as Exhibit 1.

3. Defendants interposed a Verified Answer (the "Answer") dated October 29, 2019.

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 2)

4. The Complaint sets forth six causes of action sounding in, respectively,

Fraudulent Conveyance under DCL §273 (First Cause of Action), Fraudulent

Conveyance under DCL §274 (Second Cause of Action), Fraudulent Conveyance

under DCL §275 (Third Cause of Action), Fraudulent Conveyance under DCL

§276 (Fourth Cause of Action), Fraudulent Conveyance under DCL §278 (Fifth

Cause of Action), and Fraudulent Conveyance under DCL §279 (Sixth Cause of

Action). (Plaintiff's Exhibit 1)

5. The Plaintiff served the Defendants with a First Demand for Discovery and

Inspection ("Plaintiff's D&I") (Plaintiff's Exhibit 3) and Interrogatories

("Plaintiff's Interrogatories") (Plaintiff's Exhibit 4) on or about December 6,

2019.

6. On February 11, 2020, the Plaintiff moved by Order to Show Cause to strike the

Defendants'
Answer for their alleged failure to comply with discovery demands.

6)2
(NYSCEF Doc.

7. Thereafter, Defendants cross-moved for a protective order. (NYSCEF Doc. 7)

8. By Decision and-Order-of-the-Supreme Court (Hon. DanieLE. Sullivan, LS.C )

1
As nearly all of the Exhibits used by both sides in this Motion are already attached to the

Plaintiff's moving papers, the Defendants will refer to those Exhibits unless otherwise indicated.

2
James Moran v. Grand Slam Ventures, LLC, et al.,Nassau County Supreme Court;
Index No. 001052/2019

2 of 7
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

dated August 30, 2021 and entered in the County Clerk's Office, Nassau County

on September 2, 2021 (the "Decision/Order") (Plaintiff's Exhibit 8), the Court

Defendants'
denied Plaintiff's motion to strike the Answer and granted the motion

for a protective order to the following extent: Under the Decison and Order, the

Defendants were required to provide responses, on or before October 22, 2021, to

Plaintiff's D&I demands numbered 1, 5, 6, 8, 18, 22, 233, 25, 43, and 47

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 3) as well as Plaintiff's Interrogatories (Plaintiff's Exhibit 4)

numbered 1, 2, 5, 6, 13, 14, 16, 17, 23, and 24.

9. On October 22, 2021, the Defendants served a Response to Plaintiff's Demand for

Discovery and Inspection ("Response to D&I") (Plaintiff's Exhibit 9) and a

Response to Plaintiff's First Set of Interrogatories ("Response to Interrogatories")

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 10).

10. It should be noted here that, on August 26, 2014, Plaintiff commenced an action

Action")3
(the "Prior against Grand Slam alleging conversion and wrongful

eviction from a commercial property located at 219 Hempstead Turnpike, West

Hempstead, New York 11552 (the "Property").

11. Grand Slam defaulted in appearing in the Prior Action and successfully moved to

vacate its default, only to see the vacatur reversed on appeal. (Plaintiff's Exhibit

15)

12. On May 9, 2019, following an inquest, the Plaintiff was awarded $381,216.42 in

3
James Moran v. Grand Slam Ventures, LLC. et al.;Supreme Court of the State of New

York, County of Nassau; Index No. 008291/2014

3 of 7
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

damages against Grand Slam (the "GS Judgment"). (Plaintiff's Exhibit 15)

13. Thereafter, Mr. Moran conducted supplementary proceedings in the Prior Action,

including taking the depositions of both Mr. Steinberg and Mr. Reiner.

14. During Mr. Reiner's deposition on November 6, 2019, the following exchange

took place:

Q. Where did JG Real Estate Ventures get the $100,000 to pay the

taxes, give or take, I know you said itwas about $100,000?

A. I believe [that question is] in violation of the ruling we just had.

Q. I think itwas kind of an informal ruling, number 1. And

number I'm not to go beyond that but -
2, going

A. I'm not answering a question as to any of the assets of JG Real

Estate.

Q. My question is where did JG Real Estate Ventures come up

with the $100,000 to pay the taxes.

A. I'm not answering that question.

Q. That's part of the consideration that was given to Grand Slam.

A. I understand that.

MR. MORAN: And part of the, itwasn't a formal court rule but

part of the ruling by the Court is that I can inquire into the

consideration.

THE WITNESS: You asked the question about

consideration. I told you itwas paid. It's not part of my answer as

4 of 7
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

to where that money came from.

MR. DEL VALLE: Where the money comes from goes

directly to JG's finances.

MR. MORAN: No, itdoesn't. We are discussing

the consideration given.

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 20; Pages 19-20)

15. Prior to the court ruling referenced in the above excerpt, the parties agreed to be

bound by the determination of the court attorney for Hon. Diccis Pineda-Kerwan,

J.S.C. following a short oral argument. The determination made was that inquiry

would be limited to the formation of Defendants Grand Slam and JG, the

Assignment, and the consideration given for the Assignment.

16. Nevertheless, even after stopping the deposition to obtain the referenced court

ruling, the Plaintiff continued to go beyond the scope of what he was permitted to

ask the witness, Mr. Reiner, regarding JG's finances and, eventually, the

Appellant stopped the deposition.

17. One month later, in December of 2020, Mr. Moran served Plaintiff's D&I and

Interrogatories in this action which contained inquiries which were just as over-

broad as the disclosure demands that were at issue in the Prior Action, thus

Defendants'
triggering the motion for a protective order and resulting in the

Decision/Order from August of 2021that narrowed the scope of inquiry.

(Plaintiff's Exhibit 8).

18. Several months later,Mr. Reiner executed an affidavit on April 14, 2022

5 of 7
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

(Defendants' "8" "25"
Exhibit A) for the purpose of addressing items and of the

"24"
Plaintiff's D&I, item of the Plaintiff's Interrogatories, and the consideration

(Defendants'
paid for the conveyance of the Property from Grand Slam to JG.

Exhibit B)

19. In his affidavit, Mr. Reiner explains that he contacted TD Bank, where both Grand

Slam and JG maintained bank accounts during their respective periods of activity

nearly a decade ago, and inquired about the existence of any records maintained

by TD Bank for either entity.

20. TD Bank's employee explained to Mr. Reiner that the bank could "typically go

statement...."
back seven years for a but that TD Bank no longer had any records

for either Grand Slam or JG.

Defendants'
21. As discussed more fully in the accompanying Memorandum of Law

in opposition to the motion for sanctions, the Plaintiff's allegation that the

Defendants'
destroyed evidence is a red herring concocted solely to distract from

the stark frivolity of the causes of action contained in the Complaint.

WHEREFORE, itis respectfully requested that the Court deny the Plaintiff's motion for

sanctions along with such further and different relief that the Court deems just, proper, and

equitable.

Dated: New York, New York

August 25, 2022 .

Richard H el Valle, Esq.

Siegel & Reiner LLP
Attorneys for Defendants
59th 12th
130 East street, PlOOr

6 of 7
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 08/25/2022 04:57 PM INDEX NO. 001052/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 74 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/25/2022

New York, New York 10022

(646) 745-2805

Signature (Rule 130-1.1-a)

---

Richard H. Del x lle,Esq.

7 of 7

Case Info

Judge

Francis Ricigliano Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

August 25, 2022

Case Filing Date

May 27, 2022

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.