From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stafford v. A&E Real Estate Holdings, LLC

Supreme Court, New York County
Jul 6, 2022
2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 32131 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)

Opinion

Index No. 655500/2016 Motion Seq. No. 008

07-06-2022

JOHN STAFFORD, TIMOTHY HICKERNELL, JEFFREY NATT, DANIEL FEYKA, JULIAN JONES, DONALD G. HALL, THOMAS HUNTER, SEUN JAE OH, JANE KIM, DENISE STARAKIEWICZ, WOJTEK STARAKIEWICZ, RYAN KORELL, EMAN ASIRI, MOHAMMAD A. HAQUE, RYAN M. HALEY, MARISOL MARTINEZ, WINFIELD COOPER, MATTHEW SULLIVAN, ELISE CZAJKOWSKI, JOHN PETRALITO, ROYA BASSAM, MOLLY CROOG, SAM T. TANABE, JASON BAILEY, ALEXANDER RICHARDS, HAJERA DEHQANZADA, ALI ABIDI, DERIC MIZOKAMI, JOHN RIVERA, ALVIN REALUYO, FABIENNE FERREIRA, K.M.O. VERA, KRISTIN MYERS, JESSE NEIL, CRAIG NADEAU, ANNMARIE COLUCCI, ROSHEN CARMAN, ALVIN FERNANDEZ, MARGARET PLESS, JOSE CALVILLO, EMMANUELLA PAUL, JESUS RIOS, NINA CHIDICHIMO, NATALIE HIRSH, CRAIG CONNOLE, ALEXANDRIA KIRCHER, EARL BARRETTHOLLAWAY, SANTA PENA, DONNA DEMPSEY, SERENA FORBES, SOPHIA GREER, RUXANDRA STANCU, LEAH O'REILLY MCKUNE, RASUEL MCKUNE, DAVID WARTH, MOHAMMAD UDDIN, ELI JAMES, RICHARD DURO, NICHOLAS NAVIGLIA, MONICA THORNE, VINCENT WALLGREN, EILEEN WALLGREN, JEANNINE FRUMESS, EVAN JACOBS, WILLIAM RIVERS, GRACE SIERRA RIVERS, DANIEL REYES, OSCAR VALENCIA, Plaintiffs, v. A&E REAL ESTATE HOLDINGS, LLC, A&E REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, LLC, Defendants.


Unpublished Opinion

MOTION DATE 06/06/2022

DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION

Joel M. Cohen, Judge

The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 008) 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295 were read on this motion to COMPEL COMPLIANCE WITH SUBPOENAS

Defendants A&E Real Estate Holdings, LLC and A&E Real Estate Management, LLC ("Defendants") move to compel non-parties Alba Stone Works, Inc., Gold & Reiss Kitchen and Bath Center, Corp., D&R Marble & Granite, Inc., Freedom Marble & Granite LLC, Kitchen World Corp., and Nikqi GC, Inc. (the "Non-Parties") to comply with subpoenas duces tecum ("Subpoenas") issued to them by Defendants and for related relief. No opposition has been filed by the Non-Parties or any party. For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED to the extent the Non-Parties are directed to comply with the Subpoenas and the motion is otherwise DENIED without prejudice.

BACKGROUND

This is a putative class action in which Plaintiffs allege that Defendants charged rents in excess of what is legally permissible. (NUSCEF 170 [First Amended Class Action Complaint]). The Court has previously resolved multiple discovery disputes between the parties. (Stafford v A&E Real Estate Holdings, LLC, 2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 33090[U], 1 [N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County 2020], affd, 192 A.D.3d 648, 648 [1st Dept 2021]).

Non-Parties allegedly completed "individual apartment improvements" or "IAI's" on certain units relevant to this litigation that Defendants contend may justify rental increases. (NYSCEF 283 [Defendants' Moving Brief at 1]). Defendants' motion is supported by documents indicating that the Non-Parties completed work at Defendants' properties. (NYSCEF 285-290 [Bernard Affirmation Exs. A-F]). Defendants have also submitted copies of the Subpoenas (NYSCEF 291 [Bernard Aff. Ex. G]), affidavits of personal service on each of the Non-Parties (NYSCEF 292 [Bernard Aff. Ex. H]) and correspondence indicating Defendants' multiple efforts to have Non-Parties voluntarily comply with the Subpoenas (NYSCEF 293-294 [Bernad Aff. Exs. I-J]). Defendants filed an Affidavit of Service indicating that they served their motion on Non-Parties by FedEx. (NYSCEF 295).

DISCUSSION

Where a nonparty fails to comply with a subpoena, a party may move under CPLR § 3124 to compel compliance. (Douglas Elliman, LLC v TWP Real Estate, LLC, 189 A.D.3d 614, 614 [1st Dept 2020]; Velez v Hunts Point Multi-Serv. Or., Inc., 29 A.D.3d 104, 110[1st Dept 2006]). Defendants' motion is sufficient to show that the Subpoenas seek relevant information and that Non-Parties have not responded despite Defendants' efforts to obtain compliance. Accordingly, the Defendants' motion seeking to compel responses to the Subpoenas is GRANTED. Those branches of Defendants' motion made pursuant to CPLR § 2308 for statutory penalties and Judiciary Law § 773 for costs and expenses including attorney' fees are DENIED without prejudice to renewal should the Non-Parties fail to comply with this order within twenty (20) days of service with notice of entry upon them. (Nat. Ass'n of Water Companies v CKR Law, LLP [N.Y. Sup Ct, New York County 2022]).

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Plaintiff s motion to compel Non-Parties' compliance with the Subpoenas is GRANTED to the extent of compelling compliance and otherwise DENIED without prejudice and it is further

ORDERED that Non-Parties shall comply with the Subpoenas within twenty (20) days of the service of a copy of this Decision & Order with notice of entry upon them.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.


Summaries of

Stafford v. A&E Real Estate Holdings, LLC

Supreme Court, New York County
Jul 6, 2022
2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 32131 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)
Case details for

Stafford v. A&E Real Estate Holdings, LLC

Case Details

Full title:JOHN STAFFORD, TIMOTHY HICKERNELL, JEFFREY NATT, DANIEL FEYKA, JULIAN…

Court:Supreme Court, New York County

Date published: Jul 6, 2022

Citations

2022 N.Y. Slip Op. 32131 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2022)