Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
----------------------------------------------------------------------X
THE BOWERY HOTEL LLC,
d/b/a THE BOWERY HOTEL, Index No. 651209/2017
Plaintiff(s),
AFFIRMATION
-against-
PERI CALLIMANOPULOS
a/k/a PERCILES CALLIMANOPULOS,
Defendant.
----------------------------------------------------------------------X
Stephannie A. Miranda, Esq., an attorney admitted to practice law before the Courts of the
State of New York, affirms the following to be true under penalties of perjury:
1. I am a member of Lebedin Kofman LLP, attorneys of record for the Defendant
PERI CALLIMANOPULOS, and, as such, am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances
heretofore had herein; based upon a review of the file maintained by same office.
2. I respectfully submit this Affirmation in support of the within Motion for an Order
pursuant to CPLR Section 321(b)(2) which seeks inter alia: permitting to withdraw as attorneys of
record for the Defendant herein.
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS
3. The Defendant, PERI CALLIMANOPULOS, retained our firm to settle an alleged
debt owed to Plaintiff THE BOWERY HOTEL LLC being collected by Plaintiff’s counsel. The
representation also included defense if an action was commenced against Mr. Murray related to
this debt.
4. Plaintiff commenced this action by electronically filing a summons and complaint
on or about March 8, 2017.
1 of 4
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019
5. A default judgment was entered against Defendant on or about November 30, 2017.
6. Upon Defendant learning of the judgment when his Venmo account was frozen,
Defendant retained Lebedin Kofman to vacate the default judgment and negotiate a possible
settlement.
7. On or about June 8, 2018, Defendant, by his attorneys, filed an Order to Show
Caused to vacate the default judgment.
8. On or about June 26, 2018, the parties mutually agreed to vacate the default
judgment and allow the Defendant 30 days to file an answer.
9. Defendant’s Answer was filed on the same day.
10. Since then, the parties have been engaging in discovery.
11. Plaintiff served its responses to Defendant’s demands and discovery demands upon
Defendant on or about September 17, 2018.
12. Since then, our office has attempted to contact Defendant via phone, email, and
mail to complete our responses to Plaintiff’s. More specifically, we sent emails on October 10,
2018, October 17, 2018 and November 21, 2018. (See Emails at Exhibit A).
13. Despite having proof that Defendant opened the emails, we never received a written
response or a call from Defendant to our office. (See Email Tracking at Exhibit B)
14. On or about May 13, 2019, we emailed and mailed a letter to Defendant via Priority
Mail again advising of the vacatur of the judgment; that we had received responses to our discovery
demands; that we needed to respond to Plaintiff’s demands; and that we would be filing the instant
motion if no response was received. (See 5-13 Letter, Mail Tracking, and Email at Exhibit C).
2
2 of 4
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019
15. The letter was delivered to Defendant’s last known address (250 NE 3rd Avenue,
Delray Beach, FL 33444) on May 16, 2019. Our office has received no response from Defendant
to this letter.
16. Therefore, there has been an irreparable breakdown of communication between this
firm and Defendant that inhibits the successful representation of client in this matter.
II. WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL
17. CPLR 321(b)(2) provides that:
An attorney of record may withdraw or be changed by order of the court in which
the action is pending, upon motion on such notice to the client of the withdrawing
attorney, to the attorneys of all other parties in the action or, if a party appears
without an attorney, to the party, and to any other person, as the court may direct.
18. An attorney may withdraw from representing a client on good and sufficient cause,
upon reasonable notice to the client. Benefield v. City of New York, 14 Misc. 3d 603, 605. The
court in Countryman v Watertown Hous. Auth. (13 Misc 3d 632, 633, 820 NYS2d 757 [2006])
states, “there are three primary reasons allowing withdrawal of an attorney from a case: failure of
a party to remain in contact with counsel; deterioration of the attorney/client relationship;
nonpayment of legal fees (see Tartaglione v Tiffany, 280 AD2d 543, 720 NYS2d 404 [2001]; Lake
v M.P.C Trucking, 279 AD2d 813, 718 NYS2d 903 [2001]; Galvano v Galvano, 193 AD2d 779,
598 NYS2d 268 [1993]).
19. Moreover, the New York Code of Professional Responsibility permits an attorney
to withdraw from representation in situations where, inter alia, the client "fails to cooperate in the
representation or otherwise renders the representation unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry
out employment effectively," Rule 1.16 (b)(7).
3
3 of 4
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019
20. Here, there has been an irreparable breakdown of communications between this
firm and Defendant and a deterioration of the attorney/client relationship based on Defendant’s
complete failure to communicate with our office.
21. Based on the foregoing, I respectfully request that our firm be relieved as
Defendant’s counsel.
22. No prior application for the relief sought herein has been made.
WHEREFORE, your deponent respectfully requests that this Honorable Court permit
Lebedin Kofman LLP to withdraw as attorneys of record for the Defendant PERI
CALLIMANOPULOS herein; together with such other and further relief as this Honorable Court
may deem just and proper.
Dated: May 28, 2019
New York, NY
_____________________________
Stephannie A. Miranda, Esq.
Lebedin Kofman LLP
Attorney(s) for Defendant
26 Broadway, Suite 2100
New York, NY 10004
T:212-500-3273
4
4 of 4
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------------------X THE BOWERY HOTEL LLC, d/b/a THE BOWERY HOTEL, Index No. 651209/2017 Plaintiff(s), AFFIRMATION -against- PERI CALLIMANOPULOS a/k/a PERCILES CALLIMANOPULOS, Defendant. ----------------------------------------------------------------------X Stephannie A. Miranda, Esq., an attorney admitted to practice law before the Courts of the State of New York, affirms the following to be true under penalties of perjury: 1. I am a member of Lebedin Kofman LLP, attorneys of record for the Defendant PERI CALLIMANOPULOS, and, as such, am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances heretofore had herein; based upon a review of the file maintained by same office. 2. I respectfully submit this Affirmation in support of the within Motion for an Order pursuant to CPLR Section 321(b)(2) which seeks inter alia: permitting to withdraw as attorneys of record for the Defendant herein. I. STATEMENT OF FACTS 3. The Defendant, PERI CALLIMANOPULOS, retained our firm to settle an alleged debt owed to Plaintiff THE BOWERY HOTEL LLC being collected by Plaintiff’s counsel. The representation also included defense if an action was commenced against Mr. Murray related to this debt. 4. Plaintiff commenced this action by electronically filing a summons and complaint on or about March 8, 2017. 1 of 4 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019 5. A default judgment was entered against Defendant on or about November 30, 2017. 6. Upon Defendant learning of the judgment when his Venmo account was frozen, Defendant retained Lebedin Kofman to vacate the default judgment and negotiate a possible settlement. 7. On or about June 8, 2018, Defendant, by his attorneys, filed an Order to Show Caused to vacate the default judgment. 8. On or about June 26, 2018, the parties mutually agreed to vacate the default judgment and allow the Defendant 30 days to file an answer. 9. Defendant’s Answer was filed on the same day. 10. Since then, the parties have been engaging in discovery. 11. Plaintiff served its responses to Defendant’s demands and discovery demands upon Defendant on or about September 17, 2018. 12. Since then, our office has attempted to contact Defendant via phone, email, and mail to complete our responses to Plaintiff’s. More specifically, we sent emails on October 10, 2018, October 17, 2018 and November 21, 2018. (See Emails at Exhibit A). 13. Despite having proof that Defendant opened the emails, we never received a written response or a call from Defendant to our office. (See Email Tracking at Exhibit B) 14. On or about May 13, 2019, we emailed and mailed a letter to Defendant via Priority Mail again advising of the vacatur of the judgment; that we had received responses to our discovery demands; that we needed to respond to Plaintiff’s demands; and that we would be filing the instant motion if no response was received. (See 5-13 Letter, Mail Tracking, and Email at Exhibit C). 2 2 of 4 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019 15. The letter was delivered to Defendant’s last known address (250 NE 3rd Avenue, Delray Beach, FL 33444) on May 16, 2019. Our office has received no response from Defendant to this letter. 16. Therefore, there has been an irreparable breakdown of communication between this firm and Defendant that inhibits the successful representation of client in this matter. II. WITHDRAWAL AS COUNSEL 17. CPLR 321(b)(2) provides that: An attorney of record may withdraw or be changed by order of the court in which the action is pending, upon motion on such notice to the client of the withdrawing attorney, to the attorneys of all other parties in the action or, if a party appears without an attorney, to the party, and to any other person, as the court may direct. 18. An attorney may withdraw from representing a client on good and sufficient cause, upon reasonable notice to the client. Benefield v. City of New York, 14 Misc. 3d 603, 605. The court in Countryman v Watertown Hous. Auth. (13 Misc 3d 632, 633, 820 NYS2d 757 [2006]) states, “there are three primary reasons allowing withdrawal of an attorney from a case: failure of a party to remain in contact with counsel; deterioration of the attorney/client relationship; nonpayment of legal fees (see Tartaglione v Tiffany, 280 AD2d 543, 720 NYS2d 404 [2001]; Lake v M.P.C Trucking, 279 AD2d 813, 718 NYS2d 903 [2001]; Galvano v Galvano, 193 AD2d 779, 598 NYS2d 268 [1993]). 19. Moreover, the New York Code of Professional Responsibility permits an attorney to withdraw from representation in situations where, inter alia, the client "fails to cooperate in the representation or otherwise renders the representation unreasonably difficult for the lawyer to carry out employment effectively," Rule 1.16 (b)(7). 3 3 of 4 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/30/2019 06:38 PM INDEX NO. 651209/2017 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 56 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/30/2019 20. Here, there has been an irreparable breakdown of communications between this firm and Defendant and a deterioration of the attorney/client relationship based on Defendant’s complete failure to communicate with our office. 21. Based on the foregoing, I respectfully request that our firm be relieved as Defendant’s counsel. 22. No prior application for the relief sought herein has been made. WHEREFORE, your deponent respectfully requests that this Honorable Court permit Lebedin Kofman LLP to withdraw as attorneys of record for the Defendant PERI CALLIMANOPULOS herein; together with such other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and proper. Dated: May 28, 2019 New York, NY _____________________________ Stephannie A. Miranda, Esq. Lebedin Kofman LLP Attorney(s) for Defendant 26 Broadway, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10004 T:212-500-3273 4 4 of 4