arrow left
arrow right
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
  • APF CRE I LLC Vs TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL VS.TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET ALOTHER CIVIL document preview
						
                                

Preview

Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2022 Oct 31 11:50 AM-20CV007082 0G144 - Dé COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO CIVIL DIVISION APF-CRE I LLC, ET AL., Plaintiffs, CASE NO. 20CV-7082 Vv. JUDGE KIM BROWN TEHRAH HOSPITALITY, LLC, MAGISTRATE CORDLE ET AL., Defendants. MAGISTRATE’S ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND MOTION IN LIMINE FILED BY PLAINTIFFS AND DENYING MOTION TO QUASH FILED BY THIRD PARTY This case arises from two loans issued by Access Point Financial (“Access Point”) to Defendant Tehrah Hospitality, LLC (the “Borrower”) to purchase and improve a hotel. The loans were secured by notes, a mortgage on the hotel, and a security interest in the hotel’s fixtures. The loans were also guaranteed by Defendants Abhijit S. Vasani and Bhavna A. Vasani (the “Guarantors”). Plaintiffs APF-CRE I, LLC and APF-CPX I, LLC (the “Lenders”) are Access Point’s successor in interest. As such, they are entitled to enforce the underlying promissory notes and guarantees. The Borrower defaulted on the loans. The Lenders foreclosed on the Guarantors’ membership interests in the Borrower; a company affiliated with the Lenders purchased those membership interests at auction. In turn, the Borrower was transferred to that affiliated company, which sold the hotel at auction for $5,275,000. The Lenders filed a motion for partial summary judgment against the Guarantors, arguing they are liable for the balance of the loans after offset from sale of the Borrower's assets. The Guarantor opposed that motion, in relevant part, based on potential 1 Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2022 Oct 31 11:50 AM-20CV007082 0G144 - Dé impropriety regarding the auction of the hotel and potential devaluation of the Borrower as a result of the Lenders’ affiliates’ takeover of it. Judge Brown granted the motion as to liability only and referred this matter to the undersigned Magistrate for a damages hearing. In doing so, she explained that the issues raised by the Guarantors “concern how much Guarantors owe in damages, not whether they are liable for damages.” She further stated that “these arguments can be addressed at an evidentiary hearing on damages without affecting the question of whether the Guarantors are liable for breaching the agreements.” For avoidance of doubt, the judge further held: Guarantors are permitted to conduct discovery necessary to prepare for the damages hearing * * *.” On September 16, the Lenders filed a motion for protective order and a motion in limine. That motion asks for a ruling that “information in connection with the disposition and release of [the hotel], along with all furniture, fixtures, and equipment * * * by public auction” and information relating to the sale of the hotel are irrelevant. Those waiver arguments were litigated in the motion for partial summary judgment. Judge Brown already ruled that the information the Lenders seek to exclude is relevant to damages and that discovery about it is allowed. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED based on the law- of-the-case doctrine. For the same reasons, the motion to quash the subpoena issued to Access Point is also DENIED. SO ORDERED. Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2022 Oct 31 11:50 AM-20CV007082 0G144 - Dé Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Date: 10-31-2022 Case Title: APF CREILLC ET AL -VS- TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL Case Number: 20CV007082 Type: MAGISTRATE ORDER So Ordered oi ie 2S fn ere leon /s/ Magistrate Jennifer R. Cordle Electronically signed on 2022-Oct-31 page 3 of 3 Franklin County Ohio Clerk of Courts of the Common Pleas- 2022 Oct 31 11:50 AM-20CV007082 0G144 - Dé Court Disposition Case Number: 20CV007082 Case Style: APF CRE| LLC ET AL -VS- TEHRAH HOSPITALITY LLC ET AL Motion Tie Off Information: 1. Motion CMS Document Id: 20CV0070822022-09-1699950000 Document Title: 09-16-2022-MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER - PLAINTIFF: APF CRE | LLC Disposition: MOTION DENIED 2. Motion CMS Document Id: 20CV0070822022-10-2799980000 Document Title: 10-27-2022-MOTION TO AMEND - PLAINTIFF: APF CRE I LLC Disposition: MOTION GRANTED