On December 21, 2020 a
Letter,Correspondence
was filed
involving a dispute between
Yasemin Tekiner,
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,
and
254-258 W. 35Th St. Llc,
Berrin Tekiner,
Billur Akipek
In Her Capacity As A Trustee Of The Yasemin Tekiner 2011 Descendants Trust,
Bremen House Inc.,
Bremen House Texas, Inc.,
German News Company, Inc.,
German News Texas, Inc.,
Gonca Tekiner,
Zeynep Tekiner,
for Commercial Division
in the District Court of New York County.
Preview
Writer’s Direct Contact:
908.333.6220 (Tel.)
PARKER IBRAHIM & BERG LLP 212.596.7036 (Fax)
scott.parker@piblaw.com
www.piblaw.com
November 22, 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, Courtroom 208
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 is co-counsel to Co-Plaintiff Yasemin Tekiner (“Yasemin”) in the above-
referenced matter. In accordance with Commercial Division Rule 14 B and Section VI.B and
VII.B of Your Honor’s Individual Practices and Procedures, and as the parties discussed with Ms.
Klinger on November 10, 2022, we write to respectfully request a conference to resolve the
ongoing dispute as to Defendants’ refusal to produce the relevant banking records for the Company
defendants.
Yasemin has been attempting to obtain these banking records for many months – both in
formal discovery and through requests for the Company’s books and records. Except for limited
sporadic monthly statements, however, Defendants have refused to produce any such statements
in discovery. And, except for a 21-month period of statements from a single Company bank
account from Santander Bank that Billur Akipek (“Billur”) finally sent to Yasemin on October 5,
2022, Defendants have refused to provide any other statements in response to Yasemin’s books
and records demand – and even then, those statements contained multiple, inappropriate
redactions. Defendants have steadfastly refused to produce the requested banking statements
notwithstanding Billur’s sworn affidavit filed with this Court on July 20, 2022, which said that
Defendants were “committed to providing Yasemin and Zeynep access to all the books and records
of the Company.” (See NYSCEF Doc. No 654, ¶ 8.)
Further, as Your Honor is aware, Yasemin attempted (and is still attempting) to obtain the
requested banking records from Santander itself. (See NYSCEF Doc. No. 691 (subpoena to
Santander).) Defendants, however, moved to quash Yasemin’s subpoena to Santander (and lost
that motion), thus delaying by months the timeline for Yasemin to be able to obtain those records
directly from Santander. Indeed, as of the date of this letter, Santander has not yet produced the
subpoenaed banking records.
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
FH11169317.1
Accordingly, Yasemin respectfully requests a conference to resolve this issue and set a date
certain by which Defendants must produce the requested banking records.
We thank the Court for its consideration of this submission.
Respectfully submitted,
Scott W. Parker
Enclosure
cc: Stephen P. Younger, Esq. (via email)
Michele Kahn, Esq. (via email)
2
FH11169317.1
Meghan E. Hill
Direct Tel: 212-326-0808
Direct Fax: 212-326-0806
MHill@PRYORCASHMAN.com
November 30, 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, Courtroom 208
New York, New York 10007
Re: Tekiner v. Bremen House Inc. et al., Index No. 657193/2020
Dear Justice Cohen:
We represent Defendants in the above-referenced matter. Pursuant to Commercial
Division Rule 14 and Section VI.B of the Part 3 Individual Practices and Procedures, we write in
response to Plaintiff Yasemin Tekiner’s November 22, 2022 letter requesting that the Court
“resolve [an] ongoing dispute” arising out of Defendants’ purported “refusal to produce the
relevant banking records for the Company defendants,” by “set[ting] a date certain by which
Defendants must produce the requested banking records.”
As explained below, contrary to Yasemin’s contention, she has not “been attempting to
obtain these banking records for many months.” Over a year ago, Yasemin elected to forego
pursuing banking records, and Defendants cannot be blamed for that decision. Yasemin’s request
should be denied.
In October 2021, Yasemin served her Third Request for the Production of Documents
seeking egregiously overbroad financial information from all Defendants. Specifically, Requests
39 and 40 seek “all statements of any bank account, brokerage account, or other financial account
in which Defendants and/or Zeynep Tekiner have an interest” and “all statements of any credit
card, debit card, charge card PayPal, Venmo, or other payment system through which Defendants
and/or Zeynep Tekiner made or received payments or had the right to make or receive payments”
for the period “from January 1, 2011 to the present.” Defendants timely and properly objected to
these requests as overbroad and as seeking information not material and necessary to any of the
claims and defenses in the case.
Yasemin then did nothing. She did not attempt to narrow her requests to address
Defendants’ objections. She did not request a meet and confer in accordance with 22 NYCRR
202.7 and Rule 14 of the Commercial Division. And she did not make a motion to compel.
Yasemin sat silent on this topic for thirteen months until now – thirty days prior to the close of
discovery – when she for the first time disingenuously claims “Defendants have refused to produce
Hon. Joel M. Cohen, J.S.C.
November 30, 2022
Page 2
any such statements in discovery.” This claim is false; Yasemin elected not to continue pursuit of
these statements, and Defendants cannot be blamed for that decision.1
Accordingly, Yasemin’s request should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
Meghan E. Hill
cc: Counsel of Record (via email)
1
As Yasemin admits in her letter, in response to Yasemin’s demand to inspect the books and records of Bremen
House, Inc., in September 2022, Defendants produced all bank statements for Bremen House issued during the 21-
month period from when Yasemin was removed as a director of Bremen House through the date of production.
Preview
Writer’s Direct Contact: 908.333.6220 (Tel.) PARKER IBRAHIM & BERG LLP 212.596.7036 (Fax) scott.parker@piblaw.com www.piblaw.com November 22, 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, Courtroom 208 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 is co-counsel to Co-Plaintiff Yasemin Tekiner (“Yasemin”) in the above- referenced matter. In accordance with Commercial Division Rule 14 B and Section VI.B and VII.B of Your Honor’s Individual Practices and Procedures, and as the parties discussed with Ms. Klinger on November 10, 2022, we write to respectfully request a conference to resolve the ongoing dispute as to Defendants’ refusal to produce the relevant banking records for the Company defendants. Yasemin has been attempting to obtain these banking records for many months – both in formal discovery and through requests for the Company’s books and records. Except for limited sporadic monthly statements, however, Defendants have refused to produce any such statements in discovery. And, except for a 21-month period of statements from a single Company bank account from Santander Bank that Billur Akipek (“Billur”) finally sent to Yasemin on October 5, 2022, Defendants have refused to provide any other statements in response to Yasemin’s books and records demand – and even then, those statements contained multiple, inappropriate redactions. Defendants have steadfastly refused to produce the requested banking statements notwithstanding Billur’s sworn affidavit filed with this Court on July 20, 2022, which said that Defendants were “committed to providing Yasemin and Zeynep access to all the books and records of the Company.” (See NYSCEF Doc. No 654, ¶ 8.) Further, as Your Honor is aware, Yasemin attempted (and is still attempting) to obtain the requested banking records from Santander itself. (See NYSCEF Doc. No. 691 (subpoena to Santander).) Defendants, however, moved to quash Yasemin’s subpoena to Santander (and lost that motion), thus delaying by months the timeline for Yasemin to be able to obtain those records directly from Santander. Indeed, as of the date of this letter, Santander has not yet produced the subpoenaed banking records. 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 FH11169317.1 Accordingly, Yasemin respectfully requests a conference to resolve this issue and set a date certain by which Defendants must produce the requested banking records. We thank the Court for its consideration of this submission. Respectfully submitted, Scott W. Parker Enclosure cc: Stephen P. Younger, Esq. (via email) Michele Kahn, Esq. (via email) 2 FH11169317.1 Meghan E. Hill Direct Tel: 212-326-0808 Direct Fax: 212-326-0806 MHill@PRYORCASHMAN.com November 30, 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, Courtroom 208 New York, New York 10007 Re: Tekiner v. Bremen House Inc. et al., Index No. 657193/2020 Dear Justice Cohen: We represent Defendants in the above-referenced matter. Pursuant to Commercial Division Rule 14 and Section VI.B of the Part 3 Individual Practices and Procedures, we write in response to Plaintiff Yasemin Tekiner’s November 22, 2022 letter requesting that the Court “resolve [an] ongoing dispute” arising out of Defendants’ purported “refusal to produce the relevant banking records for the Company defendants,” by “set[ting] a date certain by which Defendants must produce the requested banking records.” As explained below, contrary to Yasemin’s contention, she has not “been attempting to obtain these banking records for many months.” Over a year ago, Yasemin elected to forego pursuing banking records, and Defendants cannot be blamed for that decision. Yasemin’s request should be denied. In October 2021, Yasemin served her Third Request for the Production of Documents seeking egregiously overbroad financial information from all Defendants. Specifically, Requests 39 and 40 seek “all statements of any bank account, brokerage account, or other financial account in which Defendants and/or Zeynep Tekiner have an interest” and “all statements of any credit card, debit card, charge card PayPal, Venmo, or other payment system through which Defendants and/or Zeynep Tekiner made or received payments or had the right to make or receive payments” for the period “from January 1, 2011 to the present.” Defendants timely and properly objected to these requests as overbroad and as seeking information not material and necessary to any of the claims and defenses in the case. Yasemin then did nothing. She did not attempt to narrow her requests to address Defendants’ objections. She did not request a meet and confer in accordance with 22 NYCRR 202.7 and Rule 14 of the Commercial Division. And she did not make a motion to compel. Yasemin sat silent on this topic for thirteen months until now – thirty days prior to the close of discovery – when she for the first time disingenuously claims “Defendants have refused to produce Hon. Joel M. Cohen, J.S.C. November 30, 2022 Page 2 any such statements in discovery.” This claim is false; Yasemin elected not to continue pursuit of these statements, and Defendants cannot be blamed for that decision.1 Accordingly, Yasemin’s request should be denied. Respectfully submitted, Meghan E. Hill cc: Counsel of Record (via email) 1 As Yasemin admits in her letter, in response to Yasemin’s demand to inspect the books and records of Bremen House, Inc., in September 2022, Defendants produced all bank statements for Bremen House issued during the 21- month period from when Yasemin was removed as a director of Bremen House through the date of production.