Motion,Ex Parte: Yasemin Tekiner in her individual capacity, as a beneficiary and a Trustee of The Yasemin Tekiner 2011 Descendants Trust and derivatively as a holder of equitable interests in a shareholder or a member of the Company Defendants v. Bremen House Inc., German News Company, Inc., Berrin Tekiner, Gonca Tekiner, Billur Akipek in her capacity as a Trustee of the Yasemin Tekiner 2011 Descendants Trust, Zeynep Tekiner (Intervenor Plaintiff)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Writer’s Direct Contact:
                                                                                                                            908.333.6220 (Tel.)
         PARKER                    IBRAHIM                     &      BERG               LLP                                 212.596.7036 (Fax)
                                                                                                                       scott.parker@piblaw.com
                                                                                                                               www.piblaw.com

                  September 26, 2022

                  VIA NYSCEF
                  Hon. Joel M. Cohen, J.S.C.
                  Supreme Court of the State of New York
                  County of New York
                  Commercial Division
                  60 Centre Street
                  New York, New York 10007

                           Re:      Yasemin Tekiner, et al. v. Bremen House Inc., et al.
                                    Index No.: 657193/2020

                  Dear Justice Cohen:
                           This firm represents the plaintiff Yasemin Tekiner (“Yasemin”) as co-counsel in the above-
                  referenced action.     We write in response to Defendants’ belated and improperly filed “Motion to
                  Quash” (the “Motion”) filed on September 19, 2022, which seeks to quash Yasemin’s August 9,
                  2022 subpoena to Santander Bank, N.A. (the “Subpoena”).                   (See Doc. No. 688).       Yasemin filed
                  her opposition on September 23, 2022 (see Doc. No. 698), and for the reasons below, respectfully
                  requests that this Court issue a ruling on the Motion prior to the October 11, 2022 return date.
                           First, Defendants’ Motion is untimely because it was filed after the Subpoena’s return date.
                  Defendants have repeatedly misrepresented Santander’s response deadline as September 16, 2022,
                  when, in fact, and as Defendants know, it was September 15, 2022.               Indeed, counsel for Defendants
                                                      1
                  admits this in her affirmation.        Despite the same, both Defendants’ correspondence to the Court
                  seeking guidance on how to proceed2 and their Motion3 continues to misrepresent the return date.
                  Based on Defendants’ misrepresentation, the Court’s Law Clerk advised that Defendants had until
                  September 16 to file their papers.
                           Second, on September 15, 2022, the Court’s Law Clerk instructed Defendants that, if they
                  wished    to seek  to  quash   the Subpoena,     they needed     to proceed    by  Order    to  Show    Cause.     In
                  contravention of the Court’s directive, Defendants filed their Motion and, in a clear effort to further
                  delay discovery, set the return date for October 10, 2022 (i.e., one week after the next available
                  return date and a holiday) – just one week before the close of discovery, and after the noticed dates
                  for  Berrin’s   and  Gonca’s    depositions.     Defendants’     decision   to file  a Motion    when    this Court
                  requested an Order to Show Cause was strategic: it not only allowed Defendants to delay the ruling,

                  1
                   (See Doc. No. 690 at ¶ 37 (admitting that “Plaintiff’s counsel agreed to extend the return date for
                  the Subpoena by one week to September 15, 2022”).)
                  2
                    (See   Doc.   No.   715)   (advising    the  Court    on  September      15,  2022   that   “Plaintiff  served    a
                  subpoena…returnable tomorrow.”) (emphasis in original).)
                  3
                   (See Doc. No. 689 at p. 9.)
                       New York Office: 5 Penn Plaza, Suite 2371 – New York, New York 10001 – 212.596.7037
                        New Jersey Office: 270 Davidson Avenue – Somerset, New Jersey 08873 – 908.725.9700

                               BOSTON – NEW JERSEY – NEW YORK – ORANGE COUNTY – PHILADELPHIA
                  but it granted them the right to file a reply, which further drags out briefing and which they would
                  not be entitled to had they filed an Order to Show Cause as instructed.
                           In  sum,   Yasemin     served   her  Subpoena     on   August    9,  2022.    Defendants     waited   until
                  September 16, 2022 to file a motion now returnable October 11, 2022.                     Not only is the Motion
                  untimely, but it was      filed in direct contravention      of this Court’s instructions to file an Order         to
                  Show    Cause.     As  discovery    ends   on  October    17,  2022,   any  further   unnecessary     delay   would
                  undoubtedly prejudice Yasemin.           Accordingly, for these reasons, Yasemin respectfully requests
                  that  the Motion    should   be  considered     fully briefed   and  this  Court   should   not  delay   issuing  its
                  ruling.

                           We thank the Court for its consideration of this submission.


                                                                                 Respectfully submitted,
                                                                                 /s/ Scott W. Parker
                                                                                 Scott W. Parker
                  cc:      All counsel of record (via NYSCEF)




                                                                            2