arrow left
arrow right
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
  • Netanel Holdings, Llc v. Sari Orstein, Abble Awning Co, Inc.,, Gaad OrsteinReal Property - Mortgage Foreclosure - Residential document preview
						
                                

Preview

FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2023 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 724526/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS X NETANEL HOLDINGS LLC, INDEX # 724526/2020 (formerly known as PLAINTIFF, INDEX # 1988/2006) AFFIRMATION OF SHELDON FARBER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT 0RDERING FORECLOSURE SALE OF 1018 BAY 24TH STREET FAR ROCKAWAY, NY BLOCK 15731 LOT 0074 -against- SARI ORSTEIN, ABBLE AWNINGS CO. INC., GAAD ORSTEIN DEFENDANTS. X SHELDON FARBER, an attorney duly admitted to practice in the State of New York, affirms under the penalties of perjury as follows: 1. I represent the defendant Sari Orstein and am familiar with the facts. This is a foreclosure proceeding. I have previously appeared in this action by submitting a motion opposing the foreclosure. 2. The Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and allowed the foreclosure to go forward. (Exhibit ONE bearing Index # 1988/2006 is the judgment I am seeking to vacate). 1 of 6 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2023 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 724526/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2023 3. Based upon newly discovered evidence and facts, not available in the public record or obtainable through tried and standard professional legal searches, and in the interest of justice, equity and fairness, as explained below, I respectfully request that this Court issue a Temporary Restraining Order restraining the Plaintiff from conducting a foreclosure sale herein and also a judgment setting aside the attached judgment. 4. My request is based on CPLR 5015 a (3) which provides: “CPLR 5015 Relief from judgment or order (a) On motion. The court which rendered a judgment or order may relieve a party from it upon such terms as may be just, on CEF motion of any int erested person with such notice as the court may direct, upon the ground of: (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or other misconduct of an adverse party;” 5. As indicated above in the Index # 1988/2006, this case has a long history. (Note that another Index # 724526/2020 was subsequently assigned to this case when it was converted to the NYSCEF system, which was not available at the inception of these proceedings.) My involvement is recent in the history of this case. 6. I have practiced law for over 60 years and I specialize in mortgage foreclosure defense. I interviewed Sari Orstein and her husband Samuel Orstein and agreed to represent the defendant 2 of 6 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2023 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 724526/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2023 because there were legitimate grounds to do so. They both claimed that the affidavit of service of the summons and complaint was not true and that at the alleged time of service Sari Orstein was mentally impaired and thus not a person who was legally a defendant. These arguments were disregarded by the Court, as is evident in the judgment, Exhibit ONE, because of the fact that Sari Orstein initially defaulted in answering the summons for many years and that she was certainly aware of the proceeding through the considerable efforts of her husband to contest the foreclosure. I filed a Notice of Appeal but did not perfect the appeal for various good reasons including the unstable mental state of Sari Orstein. She is now mentally alert and fully lucid. 7. Because of my instinctive feelings about this case I made a further effort, without compensation, to see if there was anything that I might detect which showed fraud. Despite my efforts there was nothing in the public records or other typically available sources that revealed anything that I could use to assist my client. 8. I discussed this this case with other lawyers and luckily in January, 2023 I was put in touch with Robert Garrasi, a non-lawyer, who is an outstanding researcher and expert in fraud detection. He undertook to review this case and he concluded that right from the start an outrageous fraud was perpetrated on 3 of 6 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2023 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 724526/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2023 this Court, and that in the interest of justice and equity the judgment should be vacated. 9. I have reviewed his affidavit, exhibits and other materials and I confirm that his submission is true and legally valid. I incorporate it as if fully stated herein. 10. The Court of Appeals of the State of New York Woodson v. Mendon Leasing, 100 N.Y.2d 62 (2003), 790 N.E.2d 1156, 760 N.Y.S.2d 727, in a case resting on CPLR 5015 a (3) as in the instant case, announced clearly that “In addition to the grounds set forth in section 5015 (a), a court may vacate its own judgment for sufficient reason and in the interests of substantial justice (see Ladd v Stevenson, 112 NY 325, 332 [1889];” The Woodson case ruled against the appellant but the foregoing quote is clear law and is definitively applicable herein. 11. Sari Orstein is undeniably an interested party and entitled to relief from the prevalent fraud in the instant case. Please note also that the Woodson case was argued 13 years after it started (1990-2003). There is no Statute of Limitations for relief based upon CPLR a (3). 12. This Court has the power to eliminate a rank injustice. 13. As indicated above I have previously asked for similar relief but herein I ask for the court to vacate the judgment 4 of 6 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2023 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 724526/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2023 based upon newly discovered grounds. 14. Based upon the facts and law, I respectfully request that this Court issue a Temporary Restraining Order preventing any foreclosure sale and further, based upon previously unknown and undiscoverable facts, I request that this Court vacate the Judgment. DATED: MARCH 14, 2023 NEW YORK, NEW YORK AFFIRMED SHELDON FARBER 5 of 6 FILED: QUEENS COUNTY CLERK 03/15/2023 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 724526/2020 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 13 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/15/2023 6 of 6