Ocean Pacific Interiors, Inc. v Farber

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Ocean Pacific Interiors, Inc. v Farber 2014 NY Slip Op 30387(U) February 7, 2014 Sup Ct, New York County Docket Number: 113911/2011 Judge: Lucy Billings Cases posted with a "30000" identifier, i.e., 2013 NY Slip Op 30001(U), are republished from various state and local government websites. These include the New York State Unified Court System's E-Courts Service, and the Bronx County Clerk's office. This opinion is uncorrected and not selected for official publication. SCANNEDON2/13/20141 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ [* 1] SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK - NEW YORK COUNTY LUCY PRESENT: B~LLH···lGS ,... W'. PART 'tv ·'"'''Justice INDEX NO. Index Number: 113911/2011 OCEAN PACIFIC INTERIORS, INC. vs. FARBER, M.D., PLLC, LEONARD A. SEQUENCE NUMBER : 002 MOTION DATE · MOTION SEQ. NO. PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT MOTION CAL. NO. PAPERS NUMBERED J-3 Notice of Motion/ Order to Show Cause - Affidavits - Exhibits ... z Answering Affidavits - Exhibits - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (/) <( Cross-Motion: a: Upon the foregoing papers, it is ordered that~: ( /) 0 Replying A f f i d a v i t s - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Y~s 5 i?;' No w CJ ~ !: -~ 0 ln ;:) ...I ..., ...I 0 f2 1lu tf)ANr~t:s p1Mrtitf>' ~ti1t1fvr.~MJIA.l#l/'~M,tdL µ~s t¥U[U" 100 {ltu,.lllM Fu ClAJIU¥i J,u)(f'l)X· C.p. L. .Jl. · J J;i.·IJ(h). t- w c J: w t- uc, P~ FILED a: a: a: 0 l FEB 13 2014 a: >- ~~ ~ ~ u.. w tD f).t ' ~~CJFFO!.; ...I ...I ;:) u.. t- '_; ... ¢-" o w ll. (/) w a: ,(/) w (/) <( z 0 0 j:: 0 Dated: l-{ 1 /1+ J.S.C. 2 Check one: FINAL DISPOSITION Check if appropriate: ; ,,.,. NON-FINAL·IlJISPOSITION DO NOT POST [* 2] SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: PART 46 - ------ ---- - ----------------x OCEAN PACIFIC INTERIORS, INC., and PRISTINE MAINTENANCE, INC., Index No. 113911/2011 Plaintiffs against - DECISION AND ORDER LEONARD A. FARBER, M.D., PLLC, LEONARD A. FARBER, M.D., TANYA TOHILL FARBER, MARNEE SPIERER, M.D., and 100 CHURCH FEE OWNER, LLC, Defendants -- ---- ------- - - ------- ------x Ff . NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK'S OFFlCF= LUCY BILLINGS, J.S.C.: I. 1 3 2014 BACKGROUND Plaintiffs sue defendants for nonpayment of the agreed costs of construction and renovations plaintiffs performed pursuant to contract for Leonard A. Farber, M.D., PLLC {the Farber Center), on its premises, which were leased from defendant 100 Church Fee Owner, LLC. The Farber Center executed a promissory note to cover the costs, which defendants Leonard A. Farber, M.D., his wife Tanya Tohill Farber, and Marnee Spierer, M.D., personally guaranteed. Plaintiffs move for summary judgment on their claim against the Farber Center for breach of the promissory note and their claim against the Farber defendants and Spierer for breach of the guaranty. C.P.L.R. § 3212{b). For the reasons explained below, the court denies plaintiffs' motion. oceanpac.156 1 [* 3] II. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARDS To obtain summary judgment plaintiffs must make a prima 1 showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, through admissible evidence eliminating all material issues of fact. C.P.L.R. § 3212(b); Vega v. Restani Constr. Corp., 18 N.Y.3d 499, 503 (2012) i Smalls v. AJI Indus., Inc., lO N.Y.3d 733, 735 (2008); JMD Holding Corp. v. Congress Fin. Corp., 4 N.Y.3d 373, 384 (2005); Giuffrida v. Citibank Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 72, 81 {2003). If plaintiffs satisfy this standard, the burden shifts to defendants to rebut that prima facie showing, by producing evidence, in admissible form, sufficient to require a Morales v. D & A Food Serv., trial of material factual issues. 10 N.Y.3d 911, 913 (2008); Hyman v. Queens County Bancorp, Inc. 3 N.Y.3d 743, 744 (2004). In evaluating the evidence for purposes of the plaintiffs' motion 1 the court construes the evidence in the light most favorable to defendants. Restani Constr. Corp. 1 18 N.Y.3d at 503; Cahill v. Triborough Bridge & Tunnel Auth., 4 N.Y.3d 35 fail to meet the Vega v. 1 37 (2004). If plaintiffs initial burden, the court must deny summary judgment despite any insufficiency in defendants' opposition. Vega v. Restani Constr. Corp., 18 N.Y.3d at 503; JMD Holding Corp. v. Congress Fin. Corp., 4 N.Y.3d at 384. III. PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS A. The Stay Imposed by Defendants' Bankruptcy Petitions Since the Farber Center filed a petition for bankruptcy March 15, 2013, and Spierer filed a petition for bankruptcy oceanpac.156 2 1 [* 4] January 10, 2014, those proceedings automatically stay this action against those two defendants. 11 U.S.C. § 362(a} (1); Education Resources Inst., Inc. v. Concannon, 69 A.D.3d 539, 540 (1st Dep't 2010); Levant v. National Car Rental, Inc., 33 A.D.3d 367, 368 (1st Dep't 2006). Since the stay does not extend to the Farbers, as nondebtor guarantors, the court decides plaintiffs' motion only against these defendants. Empire Erectors & Elec. Co., Inc. v. Unlimited Locations LLC, 102 A.D.3d 419 (1st Dep't 2013); Milliken & Co. v. Stewart, 182 A.D.2d 385, 386 (1st Dep't 1992). B. Breach of the Guaranty To demonstrate entitlement to recover on a personal guaranty, plaintiffs must present evidence of the guaranty, the amount of the debt guaranteed, and defendants' default. Carrera Casting Corp. v. Cord, 106 A.D.3d 422 (1st Dep't 2013); Acadia Woods Partners, LLC v. Signal Lake Fund LP, 102 A.D.3d 522, 523 (1st Dep't 2013); Gard Entertainment, Inc. v. Country in N.Y., LLC, 96 A.D.3d 683 (1st Dep't 2012). See Traders Co. v. AST Sportswear, Inc., 31 A.D.3d 276, 277 (1st Dep't 2006). Plaintiffs support their motion with the affidavit of Oliver Papraniku, the president of both Ocean Pacific Interiors and Pristine Maintenance, who attests that Pristine Maintenance's subcontractor, Ocean Pacific Interiors, performed construction work at the Farber Center. When the Farber Center needed more time to pay for the construction work, the Farber Center executed a promissory note November l, 2010, which the Farbers and Spierer oceanpac.156 3 [* 5] guaranteed by executing a personal guaranty. Although the Farber Center paid the first three $50,000.00 installments, it failed to remit the payment due October 1, 2011. Papraniku does not authenticate the personal guaranty that the Farbers signed. While the signature of Vivian Colon, designated as a witness, appears on the guaranty, plaintiffs do not present her or any other witness' affidavit attesting to the Farbers' signatures on the guaranty or any other evidence authenticating the guaranty. Plaintiffs therefore fail to establish a prima facie breach of the guaranty. IRE-Brasil Resseguros S.A. v. Portobello Intl. Ltd., 84 A.D.3d 637, 638 (1st Dep't 2011); Rivera v. GT Acquisition 1 Corp., 72 A.D.3d 525, 526 (1st Dep't 2010); Babikian v. Nikki Midtown, LLC, 60 A.D.3d 470, 471 (1st Dep't 2009); Bermudez v. Ruiz, 185 A.D.2d 212, 214 (1st Dep't 1992). See Singer Asset Fin. Co., LLC v. Melvin, 33 A.D.3d 355, 357-58 (1st Dep't 2006); Acevedo v. Audubon Mgt., 280 A.D.2d 91, 95 (1st Dep't 2001); People v. Bryant, 12 A.D.3d 1077, 1079 (4th Dep't 2004); Fields v. S & W Realty Assoc., 301 A.D.2d 625 (2d Dep't 2003). Plaintiffs' failure to support their summary judgment motion with admissible evidence requires denial of the motion. Suppiah v. Kalish, 76 A.D.3d 829, 832-33 (1st Dep't 2010); Galindo v. Dorchester Tower Condominium, 56 A.D.3d 285, 286 (1st Dep't 2008); Dorsey v. Les Sans Culottes, 43 A.D.3d 261 (1st Dep't 2007). See IRE-Brasil Resseguros S.A. v. Eldorado Trading Corp. Ltd., 68 A.D.3d 576, 577 (1st Dep't 2009). oceanpac.156 4 [* 6] IV. CONCLUSION In light of the automatic stay, the court denies plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment against defendants Leonard A. Farber, M.D., PLLC, and Spierer, without prejudice to a future timely motion after the bankruptcy court lifts the stay. 3212(a). C.P.L.R. § See Jackson v. Rockefeller Ctr. Props., 290 A.D.2d 315 (1st Dep't 2002); Capital One, N.A. v. Waterfront Realty II, LLC, 94 A.D.3d 683, 684 (2d Dep't 2012). On the merits of plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on their claim of breach of a guaranty against defendants Leonard A. Farber, M.D., and Tanya Tohill Farber, the court denies the motion. This decision constitutes the court's order. DATED: February 7, 2014 F 1 3 2014 NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK'S OFFl~ oceanpac.156 5 C.P.L.R. § 3212(b).

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.