Champion 221 LLC v Madave Prop. SPE, LLC

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Champion 221 LLC v Madave Prop. SPE, LLC 2013 NY Slip Op 30616(U) March 25, 2013 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 103558/12 Judge: Donna M. Mills Republished from New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service. Search E-Courts (http://www.nycourts.gov/ecourts) for any additional information on this case. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. [* 1] [* 2] SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FILED INDEX NO. IO3558112 - against - APR 012013 NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE Plaintiff, MADAVE PROPERTIES SPE, LLC, Defendant. DECISIONIORDER Donna M. Mills, J.: In this action regarding the prospective termination of a commercial lease, defendant Madave Properties SPE, LLC ("Landlord"), move, by order to show cause, seeking: (a) an order pursuant to CPLR 5 3214(b) lifting the automatic stay of discovery; and (b) a conditional order pursuant to CPLR 5 3214 and/or § 3216 directing plaintiff Champion 221 LLC ("Tenant") to produce requested disclosure. Tenant opposes the motion on the grounds that the request for disclosure is not warranted in order for Landlord to oppose Tenant's pending application for a Yellowstone injunction. Th'is case is a commercial landlordhenant dispute in which Tenant has allegedly violated applicable laws and the parties' lease. Among the issues currently being litigated by the parties pending motions is whether Tenant violated the parties' lease by assigning an interest in the lease to a third party who now supposedly controls operation of the garage premises at issue. Landlord, in an effort to prove Tenant's incurable violation of the lease, served a formal discovery demand as well as deposition notices upon Tenant. On January 7, 201 3, Landlord served its motion to dismiss Tenant's motion for Yellowstone reIief. Under CPLR 3214 (b), service of a notice of motion pursuant to CPLR 321 I, 3212 or section 3213 stays disclosure until determination of the motion unless the court orders otherwise. The stay in CPLR §3214(b) is automatic but statutorily the court may, [* 3] 103558/12 CHAMPION 221 LLC, APR 012Ol3 NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK S OFFICE Plaintiff, -against- MADAVE PROPERTIES SPE, LLC, Defendant. DECISION/ORDER Donna M. Mills, J.: In this action regarding the prospective termination of a commercial lease, defendant Madave Properties SPE, LLC ( Landlord ), move, by order to show cause, seeking: (a) an order pursuant to CPLR § 3214(b) lifting the automatic stay of discovery; and (b) a conditional order pursuant to CPLR 5 3214 and/or § 3216 directing plaintiff Champion 221 LLC ( Tenant ) to produce requested disclosure. Tenant opposes the motion on the grounds that the request for disclosure is not warranted in order for Landlord to oppose Tenant s pending application for a Yellowstone injunction. Th is case is a commercial landlordltenant dispute in which Tenant has allegedly violated applicable laws and the parties lease. Among the issues currently being litigated by the parties pending motions is whether Tenant violated the parties lease by assigning an interest in the lease to a third party who now supposedly controls operation of the garage premises at issue. Landlord, in an effort to prove Tenant s incurable violation of the lease, served a formal discovery demand as well as deposition notices upon Tenant. On January 7, 2013, Landlord served its motion to dismiss Tenant s motion for Yellowstone relief. Under CPLR 3214 (b), service of a notice of motion pursuant to CPLR 321 1, 3212 or section 3213 stays disclosure until determination of the motion unless the court orders otherwise. The stay in CPLR §3214(b) is automatic but statutorily the court may, [* 4] *- of course, direct otherwise. See, McKinney s Consolidated Laws of New York, Book 7B, Rule 3214, Practice Commentaries, David D. Siegel, p536. Despite far reaching consequences there is little case law activity on CPLR 53214. See, McKinney s Consolidated Laws of New York, Book 7B,Rule 3214, Practice Commentaries, David D. Siegel, p536. The scant precedents and CPLR 53214 (b) itself authorizes the court to order discovery not withstanding the automatic stay of CPLR 53214 (b). Hence, despite the automatic stay provision of CPLR $3214 (b) the trial court may direct otherwise if there is a legitimate need for discovery (see Reillv v Oakwood Heishts Communitv Church, 269 AD2d 582 (2nd Dept., 2000). In the instant action, Landlord seeks an emergency request for the requested discovery as they believe it is essential to its defense of Tenant s second motion for Yellowstone relief, which is scheduled for oral argument on April 11, 2013. Landlord s motion to compel discovery specifically requests materials and documents evidencing transactions between the Tenant and the third-party to which partial ownership was purportedly transferred in violation of the lease. This Court does not find, that at this juncture of the proceeding where there has been no preliminary conference, that there is a legitimate need for discovery warranting the lifting of the automatic stay provision of CPLR §3214(b). While Landlord may be entitled to some or all of the discovery it requests, the Court will decide the Yellowstone motion, and then schedule a preliminary conference so that reciprocal disclosure can proceed in the ordinary course of litigation. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that defendant s motion to lift the automatic stay of discovery and compelling plaintiff to produce requested disclosure is denied. [* 5] So Ordered NEW YQRK COUNTY CLERKS omcE

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.