Letter,Correspondence: 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
                                Bryan T. Mohler
                                                                                                                                      Partner
                                                                                                                         Direct Tel: 212-326-0252
                                                                                                                         Direct Fax: 212-798-6328
                                                                                                                BMohler@PRYORCASHMAN.com


                                                                             December 16, 2022
                  VIA NYSCEF
                  Hon. Joel M. Cohen, J.S.C.
                  Supreme Court of the State 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, and we respectfully write regarding Plaintiff Yasemin Tekiner’s
                  purported    “reply”   papers   in  support   of  Motion    Sequence     No.   37,  which    she  filed  yesterday,
                  December 15, 2022 at 3:15pm.             Yasemin’s filing – submitted on a motion filed by Intervenor-
                  Plaintiff Zeynep Tekiner, not Yasemin – is wholly improper and should be disregarded.

                           On   November      28, 2022,   Zeynep     moved    by  order  to  show   cause   for  an  order  directing
                  Defendants to follow Zeynep’s directions, issued purportedly in her capacity as the sole member
                  of  the  Trust  Committee      of  the  Zeynep    Tekiner   2011    Descendants     Trust   (the  “Motion”).     On
                  December 1, 2022, the Court directed that opposition papers were to be served by December 9,
                  2022, and reply papers by December 14, 2022.              NYSCEF Dkt. No. 883.           Defendants timely filed
                  their opposition.    NYSCEF Dkt. Nos. 890, 891, 892, 893, 894.               Zeynep (belatedly) filed her reply
                  in the early morning hours of December 15.              Then, later that day at 3:15pm, Yasemin filed two
                  “reply affirmations” with annexed exhibits (NYSCEF Dkt. Nos. 932-37) allegedly in support of
                  Zeynep’s motion.

                           Yasemin’s     filing  should   be   stricken  as  both   procedurally    and   substantively    improper.
                  Initially, as a non-movant, Yasemin cannot submit a “reply” to another party’s motion.                    Yasemin
                  also lacks the standing (or personal knowledge or expertise) to opine on the proper administration
                  of  Zeynep’s    Trust,  as she  purports   to  do.  And, even     if her  filing was   permissible,    itshould   be
                  stricken as untimely, as the papers were submitted after the Court-ordered deadline.                 Finally, in all
                  events, the factual allegations Yasemin purports to introduce – principally her “view” about the
                  qualifications   of  the  independent     Trust  Committee      members     of Zeynep’s     Trust  –  are  not  only
                  irrelevant to the Motion, but should be disregarded as factual allegations improperly made for the
                  first time on reply.    A.M. Med. Servs., P.C. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 29 Misc. 3d 87, 89 (2d Dep’t
                  2010) (“[F]actual allegations asserted for the first time [in a reply] must be disregarded.”); Qureshi
                  v. Vital Transp., Inc., 173 A.D.3d 1076, 1078 (2d Dep’t 2019) (“While additional materials were
                  Hon. Joel M. Cohen, J.S.C.
                  December 16, 2022
                  Page 2


                  submitted together with a client affidavit on reply, that evidence was improperly submitted for the
                  first time with the defendants’ reply papers.”) (citations omitted).

                           Defendants     respectfully   request   that the  Court   strike  and  disregard   Yasemin’s     improper
                  December 15 filings on Motion Sequence No. 37 (NYSCEF Dkt. Nos. 932-37) in their entirety.

                                                                             Respectfully submitted,


                                                                             Bryan T. Mohler



                  cc:    Counsel of Record (via NYSCEF)