Preview
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021
EXHIBIT C
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019
.
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021
T
KAZLOW & KAZLOW
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
NEW YORK OFFICE www.k=!c".=dk±ew.com VERMONT AFFILIATE
237 W. 35* Street, 146 Floor CSE Law PLC
New York, NY 10001 P.O. Box 1385
Phone: (212) 947-2900 VT 05601
Montpelier,
Toll Free: (800)772-9870 Phone: (800)
772-9870
Fax: (212) 563-0629
March 11, 2021
Gene R. Knzlow, Esq.
StuartL. Sanders, Esq.
IngridGolcmi, Esq.
VIA E-MAIL and REGULAR MAIL
Daniel B. Rinaldi, Esq.
Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C.
990 Stewart Avenue, Suite 300
P.O. Box 9194
Garden City, NY 11530-9194
Re: Roxx Alison Ltd. v. Snectrum Blue. LLC et al.
Sup. Ct.,Nassau Co., Index No. 611620/2019
Snectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibayof
Sup. Ct., Nassau Co., Index No. 612557/2019
Daniel Alibayof and Ronny Alibavof v. Jocalio Group LLC
Sup. Ct., Nassau Co., Index No. 612571/2019
Dear Dan:
clients'
I am writing with respect to your revised document and interrogatory responses in
the three cases referenced above.
I would first note that the only additional document produced with the revised responses
is a single,untitled, 14-page document which appears to listtransactions with various jewelers by
date and amount, without any description of what the transactions were. In short, you have made
clients'
no attempt to address the listof items missing from your production which I setforth at
pages 2 through 4 of my letterof October 26, 2020. At the end of that list I asked you to either
clients'
point out where in your documents they appear, or to tellme ifthey do not exist, or
cannot be located in an affidavit of diligent search. You have not.
While most of your refusals to produce requested documents have now been replaced
with a statement that "Plaintiff refers Defendant to the materials bearing bates numbers
Demand,"
SBJ000001-4925 for the documents that may be responsive to thisDocument I failto
detect any of the following additional documents sought by those previously refused requests in
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021
Daniel B. Rinaldi, Esq.
March 11, 2021
Page 2
clients'
your production:
With respect to Roxx Alison Ltd. v. Snectrum Blue. LLC et al.:documents concerning
Blues'
Spectrum use of funds received from Roxx Alison's customers to pay down debts owed
by Roxx Alison to Spectrum Jewelry Mfg., LLC, Jocatio Group LC, Shutle Inc. or Spectrum by
Roxx Ltd. (Req. No. 12); documents concerning any insurance policy that has covered Roxx
Alison's collateral against damage or loss since itwas taken into the possession of defendants
(Req. Nos. 16 and 21); communications between the parties cóncerning the removal of Roxx
Alison's collateral from the safe in Roxx Alison's office and itsreceipt by the defendants (Req.
No. 17); communications between Val Katayev and Egor Israelov concerning the identification
and segregation of Roxx Alison's collateral, itsremoval from Roxx Alison's safe and office, and
itssubsequent disposition (Req. No. 18); documents concerning the changing of the locks on the
safe in Roxx Alison's office where the collateral was stored (Req. No. 19); documents
identifying the bank vaults where Roxx Alison's collateral has been stored since in was taken in
to the possession of defendants (Req. No. 21); and documents concerning gay,1m,1ts made by
defendants or Jocalio Group LLC to purchase of Roxx Alison's collateral (Req. No. 27).
With respect to Spectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibayof: documents concerning
Blues'
Spectrum use of funds received from Roxx Alison's customers to pay down debts owed
by Roxx Alison to Spectrum Jewelry Mfg., LLC, Jocalio Group LC, Shutle Inc. or Spectrum by
Roxx Ltd. (Req. No. 11); communications between Val Katayev and Egor Israelov concerning
the identification and segregation of Roxx Alison's collateral, itsremoval from Roxx Alison's
safe and office, and itssubsequent disposition (Req. No. 12); and documents concerning
plaintiff's receipt and retention of Roxx Alison's collateral,the vaults in which plaintiff has kept
the collateral and any insurance policies covering against loss of and damage to the collateral
(Req. No. 13).
Also, with respect to Daniel Alibavof and Ronny Alibavof v. Jocatio Group LLC: account
"B"
statements sent by defendant to plaintiffs conceming sales to the customers listed in Exhibit
plaintiffs'
to requests (Req. No. 13); documents concerning any Royalty Buyout payments made
defendant to plaintiffs pursuant to par. 7 of the Sales-Representation - Letter of Intent
by Binding
(Req. No. 17).
As I stated in my letter of August 6, 2020, ifyou disagree, and believe that you have
produced the items just listed,then please point out where in your document production they
appear. On the other hand, ifno such documents exist, or they cannot be located aftera diligent
search, then say so, and provide me with an affidavit of diligent search.
Next, your computation of damages in response to Interrogatory No. 20 in Spectrum
Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibayof, is woefully inadequate. Your client has now stated under oath
that the unpaid principal of the debt is $1,302,185.15. In itsVerified Complaint, dated
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021
Daniel B. Rinaldi, Esq.
March 11, 2021
Page 3
November 19, 2019, italleged that $1,053,669.06 was due, which amount was alleged to include
only $712,925.90 in unpaid principal. In addition, in itsdefault letter of September 7, 2017, the
total debt, including principal and accrued interest, was stated to be $946,328.99. Considering
that no further credit was extended by plaintiff to Roxx. Alison after this action was commenced,
the unexplained subsequent growth of the unpaid principal claimed by 45% begs for
particularization, as does the statement in your response that $109,708.10 in unpaid interest is
due, which is lessthan half the amount of the unpaid interest claimed in the Verified Complaint,
i.e.$227,910.44. Itis therefore demanded thatthe response to Interrogatory No. 20 be further
revised to set forth a true computation of the alleged damages, including particularization by
amount and source of allamounts included as principal, allpayments and credits applied, the
interest rate(s) applied,.the amounts on which interest was run, and dates from which interest was
run.
Finally, you have continued to refuse the production of the documents sought in
Document Request Nos. 19 and 20 in Spectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibavof, i.e.documents
showing he costs, expenses and disbursements claimed by Spectrum Blue, as well as your
retainer agreement and bills for your fees and disbursements. To the extent that you claim those
documents are privileged, they are not [Priest v. Hennessy. 51 N.Y.2d 62,69, 431 N.Y.S. 511,514
(1980)(fee arrangements not privileged); Cutrone v. Gaccione, 210 A.D.2d 289,291, 619
(2"d
N.Y.S.2d 758,760 Dept. 1994)], although the narrative portions of your bills may be redacted
to the extent that they would disclose privileged communications or reveal your trialstrategy.
See Orance County Publications. Inc.. a Div. of Ottaway Newspapers v. County of Orance, 168
Misc.2d 346,357-58, 637 N.Y.S.2d 596,604 (Sup. Ct., Orange Co. 1995)(bills not privilged, but
subject to Brandman v. Cross & Brown Co. of Florida. Inc., 1326 Misc.2d 185,187-
redaction);
89, 479 N.Y.S.2d 435,437-38 (Sup. Ct., Kings Co. 1984)(bills not privileged, but subject to
redaction. Also, to the extent that you claim that the requests are premature, they are not ifyour
client is adding the legal fees and expenses that itis incurring to the principal amount of the debt,
which seems likely given the rapid expansion of the principal claimed. For these reasons, the
immediate production of the documents sought in Request Nos. 19 and 20 isdemanded.
Very truly yours,
KAZLOW & KAZLOW
Stuart L. Sanders
Preview
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021 EXHIBIT C FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019 . NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021 T KAZLOW & KAZLOW ATTORNEYS AT LAW NEW YORK OFFICE www.k=!c".=dk±ew.com VERMONT AFFILIATE 237 W. 35* Street, 146 Floor CSE Law PLC New York, NY 10001 P.O. Box 1385 Phone: (212) 947-2900 VT 05601 Montpelier, Toll Free: (800)772-9870 Phone: (800) 772-9870 Fax: (212) 563-0629 March 11, 2021 Gene R. Knzlow, Esq. StuartL. Sanders, Esq. IngridGolcmi, Esq. VIA E-MAIL and REGULAR MAIL Daniel B. Rinaldi, Esq. Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C. 990 Stewart Avenue, Suite 300 P.O. Box 9194 Garden City, NY 11530-9194 Re: Roxx Alison Ltd. v. Snectrum Blue. LLC et al. Sup. Ct.,Nassau Co., Index No. 611620/2019 Snectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibayof Sup. Ct., Nassau Co., Index No. 612557/2019 Daniel Alibayof and Ronny Alibavof v. Jocalio Group LLC Sup. Ct., Nassau Co., Index No. 612571/2019 Dear Dan: clients' I am writing with respect to your revised document and interrogatory responses in the three cases referenced above. I would first note that the only additional document produced with the revised responses is a single,untitled, 14-page document which appears to listtransactions with various jewelers by date and amount, without any description of what the transactions were. In short, you have made clients' no attempt to address the listof items missing from your production which I setforth at pages 2 through 4 of my letterof October 26, 2020. At the end of that list I asked you to either clients' point out where in your documents they appear, or to tellme ifthey do not exist, or cannot be located in an affidavit of diligent search. You have not. While most of your refusals to produce requested documents have now been replaced with a statement that "Plaintiff refers Defendant to the materials bearing bates numbers Demand," SBJ000001-4925 for the documents that may be responsive to thisDocument I failto detect any of the following additional documents sought by those previously refused requests in FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021 Daniel B. Rinaldi, Esq. March 11, 2021 Page 2 clients' your production: With respect to Roxx Alison Ltd. v. Snectrum Blue. LLC et al.:documents concerning Blues' Spectrum use of funds received from Roxx Alison's customers to pay down debts owed by Roxx Alison to Spectrum Jewelry Mfg., LLC, Jocatio Group LC, Shutle Inc. or Spectrum by Roxx Ltd. (Req. No. 12); documents concerning any insurance policy that has covered Roxx Alison's collateral against damage or loss since itwas taken into the possession of defendants (Req. Nos. 16 and 21); communications between the parties cóncerning the removal of Roxx Alison's collateral from the safe in Roxx Alison's office and itsreceipt by the defendants (Req. No. 17); communications between Val Katayev and Egor Israelov concerning the identification and segregation of Roxx Alison's collateral, itsremoval from Roxx Alison's safe and office, and itssubsequent disposition (Req. No. 18); documents concerning the changing of the locks on the safe in Roxx Alison's office where the collateral was stored (Req. No. 19); documents identifying the bank vaults where Roxx Alison's collateral has been stored since in was taken in to the possession of defendants (Req. No. 21); and documents concerning gay,1m,1ts made by defendants or Jocalio Group LLC to purchase of Roxx Alison's collateral (Req. No. 27). With respect to Spectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibayof: documents concerning Blues' Spectrum use of funds received from Roxx Alison's customers to pay down debts owed by Roxx Alison to Spectrum Jewelry Mfg., LLC, Jocalio Group LC, Shutle Inc. or Spectrum by Roxx Ltd. (Req. No. 11); communications between Val Katayev and Egor Israelov concerning the identification and segregation of Roxx Alison's collateral, itsremoval from Roxx Alison's safe and office, and itssubsequent disposition (Req. No. 12); and documents concerning plaintiff's receipt and retention of Roxx Alison's collateral,the vaults in which plaintiff has kept the collateral and any insurance policies covering against loss of and damage to the collateral (Req. No. 13). Also, with respect to Daniel Alibavof and Ronny Alibavof v. Jocatio Group LLC: account "B" statements sent by defendant to plaintiffs conceming sales to the customers listed in Exhibit plaintiffs' to requests (Req. No. 13); documents concerning any Royalty Buyout payments made defendant to plaintiffs pursuant to par. 7 of the Sales-Representation - Letter of Intent by Binding (Req. No. 17). As I stated in my letter of August 6, 2020, ifyou disagree, and believe that you have produced the items just listed,then please point out where in your document production they appear. On the other hand, ifno such documents exist, or they cannot be located aftera diligent search, then say so, and provide me with an affidavit of diligent search. Next, your computation of damages in response to Interrogatory No. 20 in Spectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibayof, is woefully inadequate. Your client has now stated under oath that the unpaid principal of the debt is $1,302,185.15. In itsVerified Complaint, dated FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 04/12/2021 07:24 PM INDEX NO. 612557/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/12/2021 Daniel B. Rinaldi, Esq. March 11, 2021 Page 3 November 19, 2019, italleged that $1,053,669.06 was due, which amount was alleged to include only $712,925.90 in unpaid principal. In addition, in itsdefault letter of September 7, 2017, the total debt, including principal and accrued interest, was stated to be $946,328.99. Considering that no further credit was extended by plaintiff to Roxx. Alison after this action was commenced, the unexplained subsequent growth of the unpaid principal claimed by 45% begs for particularization, as does the statement in your response that $109,708.10 in unpaid interest is due, which is lessthan half the amount of the unpaid interest claimed in the Verified Complaint, i.e.$227,910.44. Itis therefore demanded thatthe response to Interrogatory No. 20 be further revised to set forth a true computation of the alleged damages, including particularization by amount and source of allamounts included as principal, allpayments and credits applied, the interest rate(s) applied,.the amounts on which interest was run, and dates from which interest was run. Finally, you have continued to refuse the production of the documents sought in Document Request Nos. 19 and 20 in Spectrum Blue. LLC v. Daniel Alibavof, i.e.documents showing he costs, expenses and disbursements claimed by Spectrum Blue, as well as your retainer agreement and bills for your fees and disbursements. To the extent that you claim those documents are privileged, they are not [Priest v. Hennessy. 51 N.Y.2d 62,69, 431 N.Y.S. 511,514 (1980)(fee arrangements not privileged); Cutrone v. Gaccione, 210 A.D.2d 289,291, 619 (2"d N.Y.S.2d 758,760 Dept. 1994)], although the narrative portions of your bills may be redacted to the extent that they would disclose privileged communications or reveal your trialstrategy. See Orance County Publications. Inc.. a Div. of Ottaway Newspapers v. County of Orance, 168 Misc.2d 346,357-58, 637 N.Y.S.2d 596,604 (Sup. Ct., Orange Co. 1995)(bills not privilged, but subject to Brandman v. Cross & Brown Co. of Florida. Inc., 1326 Misc.2d 185,187- redaction); 89, 479 N.Y.S.2d 435,437-38 (Sup. Ct., Kings Co. 1984)(bills not privileged, but subject to redaction. Also, to the extent that you claim that the requests are premature, they are not ifyour client is adding the legal fees and expenses that itis incurring to the principal amount of the debt, which seems likely given the rapid expansion of the principal claimed. For these reasons, the immediate production of the documents sought in Request Nos. 19 and 20 isdemanded. Very truly yours, KAZLOW & KAZLOW Stuart L. Sanders