On May 06, 2020 a
Letter,Correspondence
was filed
involving a dispute between
David A Mazie,
Kirsh, Gelband & Stone, P.A.,
Mazie Slater Katz &Freeman,
and
Bruce H Nagel,
David Mazie,
Gregg A Stone,
Mazie Slater Katz &Freeman,
Nagel Rice Llc,
for Complex Commercial
in the District Court of Essex County.
Preview
ESX-L-003110-20 04/22/2021 11:14:37 AM Pg 1 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20211030101
April 22, 2021
Via Ecourts
Honorable Thomas Vena, J.S.C.
Essex County Superior Court
470 Dr. Martin Luther Jr. Blvd.
Newark, NJ 07102
Re: Kirsch, Gelband, et al. v. Mazie
Docket No.: ESX-L-3110-20
Meister v. Verizon NJ
Docket No.: ESX-L-4738-17
Dear Judge Vena:
As Your Honor pointed out in a prior email from chambers the
issues regarding the purported referral fee is not before the
court. In our letter dated April 16, 2021 we advised that we were
filing an action to invalidate the referral fee and alternatively
to invalidate the assignment of that referral fee. Since Mr.
Rosenbach was not a party to this case, and since no pleading had
ever been filed seeking to invalidate the referral and the
assignment, we filed a new action raising these issues.
The court agreed that the referral fee issues were not before
the court and struck paragraph 4 of Mr. Mazie’s form of order.
However, in paragraph 5 of the order entered on April 19, 2021
there is reference to Mr. Rosenbach’s one-third referral fee. Since
that issue has never been adjudicated, we assert that this language
should not be in the order and must be deleted. In view of our
challenge to this referral fee in a newly filed action, we ask
ESX-L-003110-20 04/22/2021 11:14:37 AM Pg 2 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20211030101
that this order be amended to delete this one-third language.
Please advise whether we can submit an amended order or whether a
formal motion needs to be filed with regard to paragraph 5 of the
order.
Respectfully,
Bruce H. Nagel
BRUCE H. NAGEL
BHN/ls
cc: All Counsel (via e-courts)
Document Filed Date
April 22, 2021
Case Filing Date
May 06, 2020
Category
Complex Commercial
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
ESX-L-003110-20 04/22/2021 11:14:37 AM Pg 1 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20211030101 April 22, 2021 Via Ecourts Honorable Thomas Vena, J.S.C. Essex County Superior Court 470 Dr. Martin Luther Jr. Blvd. Newark, NJ 07102 Re: Kirsch, Gelband, et al. v. Mazie Docket No.: ESX-L-3110-20 Meister v. Verizon NJ Docket No.: ESX-L-4738-17 Dear Judge Vena: As Your Honor pointed out in a prior email from chambers the issues regarding the purported referral fee is not before the court. In our letter dated April 16, 2021 we advised that we were filing an action to invalidate the referral fee and alternatively to invalidate the assignment of that referral fee. Since Mr. Rosenbach was not a party to this case, and since no pleading had ever been filed seeking to invalidate the referral and the assignment, we filed a new action raising these issues. The court agreed that the referral fee issues were not before the court and struck paragraph 4 of Mr. Mazie’s form of order. However, in paragraph 5 of the order entered on April 19, 2021 there is reference to Mr. Rosenbach’s one-third referral fee. Since that issue has never been adjudicated, we assert that this language should not be in the order and must be deleted. In view of our challenge to this referral fee in a newly filed action, we ask ESX-L-003110-20 04/22/2021 11:14:37 AM Pg 2 of 2 Trans ID: LCV20211030101 that this order be amended to delete this one-third language. Please advise whether we can submit an amended order or whether a formal motion needs to be filed with regard to paragraph 5 of the order. Respectfully, Bruce H. Nagel BRUCE H. NAGEL BHN/ls cc: All Counsel (via e-courts)