On January 24, 2018 a
Exhibit,Appendix
was filed
involving a dispute between
Cushman & Wakefield, Inc.,
and
Lawrence Tannenbaum,
for Commercial - Contract
in the District Court of New York County.
Preview
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 08/10/2023 02:11 PM INDEX NO. 61665/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 187 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/10/2023
Exhibit L
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 08/10/2023 02:11 PM INDEX NO. 61665/2021
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 187 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/10/2023
R OSMA N L EGA L , P.C.
7-11 S OUTH B ROADWAY /S UITE 209
W HITE P LAINS , N EW Y ORK 10601
P HONE : 914-339-9870
November 1, 2022
By Email and NYSCEF
Hon. Damaris E. Torrent, A.J.S.C.
Supreme Court, Westchester County
111 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
White Plains, NY 10601
IAS Part 28 – Courtroom 1201
Re: Rice v. Einsidler, Index No. 61665/2021
Dear Justice Torrent:
We write in response to opposing counsel’s unjust and hyperbolic rebuke of Plaintiff’s counsel
regarding disclosure when fourteen months have passed and only now does Defendant assert that,
on advice of counsel, Defendant undertook a search for all documents requested by Plaintiff
without result.
For fourteen months Plaintiff’s counsel had been requesting the production of the Deceased’s cell
phone. Defendant counsel first objected outright that production request. During the telephonic
meet-and-confer of August 26, 2022, Defendant admitted to possessing the Deceased’s cell phone
but continued to object to its production, only later expressing that Defendant had no access code
for the phone regardless. Plaintiff’s counsel only recently learned that Plaintiff was not in
possession of his own cell phone, but it is an important fact that the Deceased’s cell phone, over
which Defendant has possession and control, would contain the very same information, all the text
messages, that Defendant is seeking from Plaintiff. Moreover, the Deceased’s cell phone contains
the photograph allegedly taken during the tortious contact against our client in November of 2019.
Once Apple is directed to unlock the phone, Defendant will have access to that photo as well.
We suggest that instead of an “urgent conference” that would delay ongoing discovery, the Court
should be permitted to rule on the Parties’ respective motions at this point in time.
Very truly yours,
Steven M. Brunnlehrman
cc: Tayisha DuBose-Lopez, Secretary for Justice Torrent, tdlopez@nycourts.gov
C. Guzman, Senior Court Clerk for Justice Torrent, cguzman@nycourts.gov
Margaret A. Kennedy, Principal Court Attorney for Justice Torrent, makenned@nycourts.gov
Brian G. Shaffer, Principal Law Clerk for Justice Torrent, bshaffer@nycourts.gov
Jonathan Ohring, jonathan@yankwitt.com
Document Filed Date
August 10, 2023
Case Filing Date
January 24, 2018
Category
Commercial - Contract
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 08/10/2023 02:11 PM INDEX NO. 61665/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 187 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/10/2023 Exhibit L FILED: WESTCHESTER COUNTY CLERK 08/10/2023 02:11 PM INDEX NO. 61665/2021 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 187 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 08/10/2023 R OSMA N L EGA L , P.C. 7-11 S OUTH B ROADWAY /S UITE 209 W HITE P LAINS , N EW Y ORK 10601 P HONE : 914-339-9870 November 1, 2022 By Email and NYSCEF Hon. Damaris E. Torrent, A.J.S.C. Supreme Court, Westchester County 111 Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. White Plains, NY 10601 IAS Part 28 – Courtroom 1201 Re: Rice v. Einsidler, Index No. 61665/2021 Dear Justice Torrent: We write in response to opposing counsel’s unjust and hyperbolic rebuke of Plaintiff’s counsel regarding disclosure when fourteen months have passed and only now does Defendant assert that, on advice of counsel, Defendant undertook a search for all documents requested by Plaintiff without result. For fourteen months Plaintiff’s counsel had been requesting the production of the Deceased’s cell phone. Defendant counsel first objected outright that production request. During the telephonic meet-and-confer of August 26, 2022, Defendant admitted to possessing the Deceased’s cell phone but continued to object to its production, only later expressing that Defendant had no access code for the phone regardless. Plaintiff’s counsel only recently learned that Plaintiff was not in possession of his own cell phone, but it is an important fact that the Deceased’s cell phone, over which Defendant has possession and control, would contain the very same information, all the text messages, that Defendant is seeking from Plaintiff. Moreover, the Deceased’s cell phone contains the photograph allegedly taken during the tortious contact against our client in November of 2019. Once Apple is directed to unlock the phone, Defendant will have access to that photo as well. We suggest that instead of an “urgent conference” that would delay ongoing discovery, the Court should be permitted to rule on the Parties’ respective motions at this point in time. Very truly yours, Steven M. Brunnlehrman cc: Tayisha DuBose-Lopez, Secretary for Justice Torrent, tdlopez@nycourts.gov C. Guzman, Senior Court Clerk for Justice Torrent, cguzman@nycourts.gov Margaret A. Kennedy, Principal Court Attorney for Justice Torrent, makenned@nycourts.gov Brian G. Shaffer, Principal Law Clerk for Justice Torrent, bshaffer@nycourts.gov Jonathan Ohring, jonathan@yankwitt.com