On May 05, 2017 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Itria Ventures Llc,
and
Bkly Sports Shop Llc,
Brooklyn Sports Shop Llc,
Josef Strassberg,
for Other Matters - Sale or Finance of Religious/Not for Profit Property
in the District Court of New York County.
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2018 11:35 AM INDEX NO. 652438/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
---------------------------------------X
ITRIA VENTURES LLC,
: Index No. 652438/17
Plaintiff,
:
-against- AFFIRMATION IN
: SUPPORT OF MOTION
BROOKLYN SPORTS SHOP LLC,
BKLY SPORTS SHOP LLC and :
JOSEF STRASSBERG,
Defendants.
---------------------------------------X
EDWARD WEISSMAN, being duly admitted to practice
before the courts of this State, affirms the following as true
under penalties of perjury:
1. I am counsel for plaintiff Itria Ventures LLC
("Itria") and I am fully familiar with all of the facts and
circumstances hereinafter set forth. I submit this Affirmation
defendants'
in support of Itria's motion to strike answers,
made pursuant to CPLR 5 3126, for failure to provide any
discovery despite Court Orders directing same.
2. By way of example, both counsel for defendants
failed to appear at a Compliance Conference set for December 4,
2017. The conference was rescheduled for December 11, 2017.
On the afternoon of December 8, 2017, the defendants served
substitutions of counsel replacing each counsel with no one.
When my office appeared for the December 11 conference, no one
appeared for the defendants. We were given permission to move
1 of 3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2018 11:35 AM INDEX NO. 652438/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2018
defendants'
to strike answers. That is the background for this
motion.
3. To date, defendants have defaulted in producing
any documents, in responding to an expert response and in
appearing for their depositions. The conduct of the defendants
is deliberate, dilatory and highly prejudicial to Itria.
ITRIA'S MOTION SHOULD BE GRANTED
4. Itria commenced this action alleging that in
order to avoid a judgment obtained by Itria against defendant
(" Cycles"
Strassberg and an entity known as C.H. Cycles Inc. ("Cycles"),
the inventory of Cycles was transferred to the defendants in
this action for no consideration. See Complaint annexed hereto
as Exhibit "A". The corporate defendants are sister companies
of Cycles and all companies are owned and controlled by
defendant Strassberg.
5. As alleged in the Complaint, all inventory of
Cycles was transferred to the corporate defendants. Defendant
Strassberg operated the defendant businesses with the inventory
of judgment debtor Cycles. The defendant businesses operate
with same ownership, same employees, same inventory and same
phone number. This is a classic successor liability scam.
Defendants'
6. answers denied the material
"B"
allegations of the complaint. See Exhibits and "C",
respectively.
2 of 3
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2018 11:35 AM INDEX NO. 652438/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2018
7. Once issue was joined, a Preliminary Conference
was held (Exhibit "D") and discovery demands served. Itria
served a document demand, expert demand and notice of
"F"
deposition. See Exhibits "E", and "G", respectively.
8. The defendants never responded to any of Itria's
discovery demands. Counsel for defendants then stopped
appearing at Court conferences and recently were substituted
out as counsel for defendants with no new counsel substituted
"H"
in. See Exhibits and "I", respectively.
9. What defendants are doing here is playing games
with the judicial process and with Itria's right to full
discovery. Defendants have made this case needlessly costly
for Itria.
defendants'
10. Itria's motion to strike answers,
pursuant to CPLR 3126, should be granted and the matter sent to
the Office of Special Referee to hear and report or determine
the damages to which Itria is en d. <'
7
Dated: New York, New York
December 29, 2017
EDWARD EISSMAN
3 of 3
Document Filed Date
January 02, 2018
Case Filing Date
May 05, 2017
Category
Other Matters - Sale or Finance of Religious/Not for Profit Property
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2018 11:35 AM INDEX NO. 652438/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2018 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------X ITRIA VENTURES LLC, : Index No. 652438/17 Plaintiff, : -against- AFFIRMATION IN : SUPPORT OF MOTION BROOKLYN SPORTS SHOP LLC, BKLY SPORTS SHOP LLC and : JOSEF STRASSBERG, Defendants. ---------------------------------------X EDWARD WEISSMAN, being duly admitted to practice before the courts of this State, affirms the following as true under penalties of perjury: 1. I am counsel for plaintiff Itria Ventures LLC ("Itria") and I am fully familiar with all of the facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth. I submit this Affirmation defendants' in support of Itria's motion to strike answers, made pursuant to CPLR 5 3126, for failure to provide any discovery despite Court Orders directing same. 2. By way of example, both counsel for defendants failed to appear at a Compliance Conference set for December 4, 2017. The conference was rescheduled for December 11, 2017. On the afternoon of December 8, 2017, the defendants served substitutions of counsel replacing each counsel with no one. When my office appeared for the December 11 conference, no one appeared for the defendants. We were given permission to move 1 of 3 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2018 11:35 AM INDEX NO. 652438/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2018 defendants' to strike answers. That is the background for this motion. 3. To date, defendants have defaulted in producing any documents, in responding to an expert response and in appearing for their depositions. The conduct of the defendants is deliberate, dilatory and highly prejudicial to Itria. ITRIA'S MOTION SHOULD BE GRANTED 4. Itria commenced this action alleging that in order to avoid a judgment obtained by Itria against defendant (" Cycles" Strassberg and an entity known as C.H. Cycles Inc. ("Cycles"), the inventory of Cycles was transferred to the defendants in this action for no consideration. See Complaint annexed hereto as Exhibit "A". The corporate defendants are sister companies of Cycles and all companies are owned and controlled by defendant Strassberg. 5. As alleged in the Complaint, all inventory of Cycles was transferred to the corporate defendants. Defendant Strassberg operated the defendant businesses with the inventory of judgment debtor Cycles. The defendant businesses operate with same ownership, same employees, same inventory and same phone number. This is a classic successor liability scam. Defendants' 6. answers denied the material "B" allegations of the complaint. See Exhibits and "C", respectively. 2 of 3 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 01/02/2018 11:35 AM INDEX NO. 652438/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 17 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/02/2018 7. Once issue was joined, a Preliminary Conference was held (Exhibit "D") and discovery demands served. Itria served a document demand, expert demand and notice of "F" deposition. See Exhibits "E", and "G", respectively. 8. The defendants never responded to any of Itria's discovery demands. Counsel for defendants then stopped appearing at Court conferences and recently were substituted out as counsel for defendants with no new counsel substituted "H" in. See Exhibits and "I", respectively. 9. What defendants are doing here is playing games with the judicial process and with Itria's right to full discovery. Defendants have made this case needlessly costly for Itria. defendants' 10. Itria's motion to strike answers, pursuant to CPLR 3126, should be granted and the matter sent to the Office of Special Referee to hear and report or determine the damages to which Itria is en d. <' 7 Dated: New York, New York December 29, 2017 EDWARD EISSMAN 3 of 3