On July 17, 2019 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
High Line Development Llc,
and
Johnny Wooh,
Neatppon Chelsea Llc,
for Commercial Division
in the District Court of New York County.
Preview
VORK OUN Kk 04 Dv INDEX NO. 654095/2019
08 40
NYSCEF BOC. NO. 22 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 01/08/2020
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORE
COUNTY OF NEW YORE: COMMERCIAL DIVISION PART 60
oe seve x INDEX NG. SS4098/2018
HIGH LINE DEVELOPMENT LLC
MOTION DATE Og iare01e
Plaintiff,
MOTION SEQ. NO. 001
“Ye
NEATPPON CHELSEA LLG, JOHNNY WOOH DECISION + ORDER ON
MOTION
Defendants.
HON. MARCYS. FRIEDMAN:
‘The following e-filed documents, fisted by NYSCEF document number (Motion 007) 8, 6, 7, 8, 8, 10, 11
42, 13, 14, 18, 16, 17, 18, 19, 26, 24
were read on this motion tevfor JUDGMENT - DEFAULT
Plaintiff High Line Development LLC moves, pursuant to CPLR 3215, for a judgment by default
against defendant Neatppon Chelsea LLC (Tenant) and defendant Johnny Wooh (Guarantor). The
motion is unopposed.
On Septentber 7, 2018, plaintiff and Tenant entered into a written lease agreement for a term from
September 7, 2019 until January 31, 2034. Guarantor signed two guaranty agreements with plaintiff
which guaranteed Tenant's obligations under the lease agreement, Tenant failed to pay the rent duc for
May 2019. As a consequence, plaintiff terminated the lease on May 22, 2019 and evicted Tenant on
July 17, 2019, Plaintiff now seeks judgment against Tenant and Guarantor for the amount due over the
term of the Lease.
Plaintiff hes failed to demonstrate the amount to which if is entitled as a result of defendants’
default under the lease and guaranty agreements. The complaint alleges rent due through January 31
2034 in the amount of $16,926,975 (Complaint, 417, NYSCEP Doo. No. 1.) whereas plaintiff's
affidavit of merit claims “judgment against Tenant for all fixed rent and additional rent reserved in the
Lease, said sum being $15,861,828." (Alba Aff, € 10, NYSCEF Doo. No. 6.) This disorepancy must be
explained
Plaintiff has also failed to file a valid non-military affidavit for defendant Guarantor. Gee 30 USC
§ 3931.) The process server's affidavit of service states that the process server spoke to someone at
Guarantor’s residence who confirmed that Guarantor was not in military service. (Pistor Affirm., Ex. C.
NYSCEF Doo. No. 16.} Process was served by “nail and mail’—a method of service inconsistent with
the claim that the process server spoke with someone and inquired about Guarantor’s military service
itis accordingly hereby ORDERED that the motion of plaintiff for a judgment by default against
defendants is denied without prejudice to a new motion on proper papers, which shall address the above
deficiencies. Such motion shall also be supported by an affidavit of merit and ape ed judgment,
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
Se
DATE MARCY Sc F KOS OMAN, ESC.
CHECK ONE: CASE DISPOSED NOMINAL DISPOSITION
GRANTED [x DENIED GRANTED IN PART
APPLICATION: SETTLE ORDER SUBMIT ORRER
CHECK & APPROPRIATE: INCLUDES TRANSPERREASHGR SMGSUCIARY APPOINTRIENT [| BERERSNCE
SS4SHROIS HGH LINE DEVELOPMENT LLC va. NEATPPON CHELSEA LLO Page tof 4
Motion No, O01
lof 1
Document Filed Date
January 08, 2020
Case Filing Date
July 17, 2019
Category
Commercial Division
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.